OMG, Democrats Are Criminally Bad At Marketing What They Accomplish

I get this weird twitching sensation in my neck every time I hear some Republican voter or official or Trump sycophant talk about, “How much we accomplished.” It’s a thing with them. They’re conditioned to say it every time someone sticks a microphone in their face … and fails to ask the natural follow-up, which is, “What the [bleep] are you talking about?”

These days most post-Trump attention is being paid to The Big Lie and inciting a violent attack the Capitol. Important stuff. But every so often some wonk points out how astonishingly little Trump and Trump kow-towing Republicans accomplished during his four year dumpster fire. Other than the long sought after deficit-doubling Paul Ryan/Mitch McConnell tax cut, (mine went up $900, FWIW), I am not aware of any … any … significant legslation Trump and crew passed in four years. Put another way, as we know all to well, today’s Republicans are not in the policy business.

And yet … and yet … they have successfully sold the message, to their base, that they have delivered for them. Which they have as long as you count culture war attacks and grievance-mongery as “accomplisments.” (Which I believe they do.)

This all by way of contrasting the modern GOP and their entertainment echo chamber with the gross, borderline criminal ineptitude of Democrats selling their accomplishments to the general public.

Want an example? Try this on for size.

Allow me to excerpt a couple key takeaways.

The bipartisan infrastructure deal (BIF) was a historic achievement that few thought possible. But since its passage in November, the law has done little to move voter opinion in Democrats’ favor. To find out why and what to do, Third Way and Impact Research conducted a survey of 2000 likely 2022 voters to investigate voter opinion on the BIF and its messaging.

Quite simply, voters do not know the bill was passed. While voters express high levels of support for the deal once they hear about it, only 24% of voters think the bill is law. Meanwhile, a plurality (37%) says they “don’t know” the status of the bill, 30% say “it is still being worked on in Congress but isn’t law yet,” and 9% believe it is not being worked on in Congress and will not be passed. Given that a large share believes the deal is still being worked on in Congress, it is clear that voters are confusing the BIF with BBB, which, of course, has not passed. In selling this legislation, the first order of business is to remind, inform, and convince voters that it is now law.

The sound you hear is me bashing my head against a wall. An unprecedented trillion dollar bill to, you know, actually accomplish stuff. Repair roads. Rebuild bridges. Expand and improve airports. A trillion dollars worth of work for blue-collar worker-voters. And three-fourths of the public doesn’t even know it’s happening.

Jesus [bleeping] christ.

To paraphrase Joe Biden, “Here’s the deal, kids.” In modern America there is no reality unless it’s on TV. (I believe it was ex-George W. speechwriter David Frum who first said this.) All those “hard working Americans” we’re always valorizing? They’re not paying attention to legislation. They’re far more interested in who was on “The Masked Singer” and if the Vikings can win a play-off game this year.

You have to tell them …, over and over and over … what you’ve done for them. And you have to tell it to them where they are, which is watching cheesy primetime TV and sporting events. You have to rub their faces in what you accomplished for them.

Like the legendary Mayor of Chicago, Dick Daley, always did. No road or bridge in the city was ever repaired i.e. accomplished without a sign next to it saying that he, His Honor Dick Daley, made this happen … for you … much-loved fellow citizen of The Windy City.

I vividly remember back in 2010, sitting in my local roadhouse bar in Wisconsin, listening to a couple neighboring yobs piss and moan about Obama screwing things up and what a loser “that guy” was. Meanwhile, at that very moment, out the window not forty yards away a crew of a dozen guys was trenching in fiber optic cable next to the highway. A vital piece of work done by blue-collar guys a lot like the boys at the bar, and paid for by Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

I also remember someone asking Obama at one point why more people weren’t aware that this was something he signed off on, and maybe wasn’t the eye-glazing name, “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” kind of obscuring the identity of who made these jobs and improvements possible? To which Obama — a Chicago guy, mind you — said something to the effect, “What do you want me to do? Put my name on it?”

To which I screamed at the time, “Yes! Damn it! And a big picture of you pointing at it saying, ‘I did this’.”

Of course if this kind of thing were left to me not only would I slap my picture on every sign next to every construction site I’d add a line reminding “hard working Americans” that their local Republican congress critter and Senator voted against this “accomplishment.”

Why Progressives Have Every Right To Question Hillary Clinton

Hillary_is_ready_for_HillaryA lot of liberals I know are privately not all that sure if they are “Ready for Hillary,” as the Clinton boosters put it.

How can a good progressive not want to elect the first woman to the White House? If we’re not “ready,” that must mean we are sexist, right?

Hillary Clinton is running for President, not just precedent. Progressives have to make sure she truly is the best person to promote the progressive agenda over the next eight years.

This progressive has questions, and I’m not apologizing for them. Here are a few:

Is Hillary progressives’ best messenger? John Kerry.  Al Gore.  Michael Dukakis. They are all fine people, brilliant policy minds, and relatively unpersuasive on the stump. Consequently, progressives lost with them.  The 2008 vintage Hillary Clinton fell into the same category for me – relatively robotic, condescending and insincere in tone.

After President Obama, progressives are spoiled on this front. During the last two presidential elections and debates over the stimulus, health care reform and other issues, Democrats have re-learned what we learned during Bill Clinton’s time in the White House — what a huge advantage it is to have a talented Persuader-In-Chief.

Having this concern doesn’t mean I’m a misogynist. It means I want progressives to win arguments. After watching Hillary Clinton on stage for a long time, I’m not at all convinced she possess that talent.

Is Hillary a hair-triggered neocon?   In the wake of President Obama finally cleaning up George W. Bush’s messes in Iraq and Afghanistan, liberals are understandably wary of more catastrophic preemptive wars promoted by neocons.  Therefore, it should give progressives pause that neocon Robert Kagan reportedly advises Ms. Clinton on foreign policy and military issues, and considers her a kindred spirit. Here is what Kagan told the New York Times.

“If she pursues a policy, which we think she will pursue,” he added, “it’s something that might have been called neocon, but clearly her supporters are not going to call it that…”

Because of disturbing reports like this, and because Hillary voted to authorize the disastrous Iraq War, progressives have every right to question her very carefully before blindly endorsing her.

Will Hillary Take On Wall Street? As a U.S. Senator from New York, Hillary has built very close ties on Wall Street. She is no Elizabeth Warren in either tone or substance. Politico recently reported what corporate types who know Hillary well have concluded about her:

Two dozen interviews about the 2016 race with unaligned GOP donors, financial executives and their Washington lobbyists turned up a consistent — and unusual — consolation candidate if Bush demurs, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie doesn’t recover politically and no other establishment favorite gets nominated: Hillary Clinton.

The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation.

At a time when the country has the most income inequality it has had since 1928, I’m just not too thrilled with the idea of electing the corporate lobbyists’ favorite Democrat.

An unpersuasive communicator?  A darling of the hair triggered neocons?  The Wall Street lobbyists’ favorite Democrat?  No, progressives should not automatically pronounce themselves “ready” for that kind of leader.  These are not small issues for progressives. The rumpled septuagenarian socialist Bernie Sanders is hardly an electric personality, but he is getting an increasing amount of interest from progressives, because of these types of concerns about the front-runner.

To earn the right to win the Democratic presidential election, Hillary Clinton needs to prove to progressives that she has improved as a communicator since the 2008 race, explain in detail what kinds of military actions she would and wouldn’t support, and lay out a detailed plan for reigning in corporate abuses and reducing income inequality.

If Hillary Clinton doesn’t do those things in the coming months, I will make no apologies for supporting an alternative. (Oh, and I’m also extremely ready for Senator Elizabeth Warren, if she changes her mind in coming months.)  At the same time, if Hillary does those things, I then would be ready for her to be my party’s nominee for President, and precedent.

Note:  This post was featured in MinnPost’s Blog Cabin.

Obama Should Denounce The Electoral College, Even If It Saves Him

The New York Times’ poll-aggregating oddsmaker Nate Silver currently puts the chances of President Obama winning the Electoral College at about 86%, but his chances of winning the popular vote at only 51%.

In other words, there is a very real chance — a 6.9% chance according to Silver — that President Obama could win the Electoral College but lose the popular vote, as happened to President George W. Bush in his race against Al Gore in 2000.

In case you were sleeping through the film strip in Civics Class the day they covered the Constitutional Convention and the Virginia Plan, the Electoral College is what counts.   Quite incredibly, the United States of America is the only democracy on the planet where candidates can and do become the national leader without having won the highest number of votes. Continue reading