Small-time Republicans and big-time media money have been able to change the political messaging in this country by openly calling for an agenda of false rebellion in the name of freedom that actually exerts greater control and is more expensive. Many people hear the previous sentence as: “Republicans have changed the political agenda in the name of freedom.” One of the ways Republicans are successful is they offer a complicated subterfuge and dissemble pieces a few at a time. Democrats respond by talking among themselves (as this piece does!) instead of to the country.
Messages that dissemble or only speak to insiders create a disconnect, but only one of these disconnects has leverage with voters, and it is the Republican choice. Republicans confine truth to the background and focus on the places where logic has become disconnected—the places where things terribly wrong can be easily examined, using lies and blame.
In the global pop news of the moment, the Russia seizure of Crimea, a preposterous event in the modern world where respect for the sanctity of borders is the first principle of international relations, Republicans avoid this first principle and the details of Russia’s energy exports being controlled by a state-owned corporation (which means its revenues are paid to the state not the private sector). Republicans avoid the analysis of how important the massive spider-work of Ukraine’s pipelines is to Russia’s efficient transmission of gas and oil to Europe. They avoid the fears Russia has internally of becoming a country influenced by its Muslim population in its southern regions (14 percent of its population).
Instead, Republicans have created a public narrative which comes close to defending Putin’s actions by blaming Obama for not defending America’s imperialism. It is circulating as if Russia is ideologically free of imperialist tendencies. In essence, it seeks to elevate the false illusion of Russian “strength”—which is its criminality—over the policy of President Obama to allow each country to find its internal stability with a minimum of big power influence.
Imperialism is a big idea with a long history, and blame is short and sweet. Blame is the lemonade made from the political lemons handed your opponents—if you are Republican.
But no evidence supports the GOP recipe (except magical thinking!) that Putin or any Russian leaders have based moves or calculated Obama’s response into their positions and military actions.
Beginning with the Russian revolution itself, the partitioning of Germany after World War II, the 1950s invasions of several eastern European countries, the placement of missiles in Cuba, the support of insurgencies in Africa, the invasion of Afghanistan, and most recently Chechnya, Georgia and Ossetia, there is no predictive proof that a country with a long history of using military force within its region, through a variety of governments, under a variety of leaders, is tempered by American or European reaction!
Blame doesn’t need proof, just popular sentiment; blame Obama.
History and facts show the contrary. Russia plays no zero sum, either/or game; it views its interests singularly. Weighing the importance of the pipelines through Ukraine to the West and the sudden toppling of its puppet, Viktor Yushchenko (who cut bait), had far more to do with Putin’s moves than any imagined review of Obama’s policies.
Putin would be insulted at the idea he contemplated or was influenced by Obama’s policies, rather than acting on his own. He would vehemently argue his view is what is best for Russia and Russians faced with a neighbor whose family income had dropped 25% in 20 years and was leaning heavily westward in search of opportunities missing in the 1930s state-owned Russian political economy.
Putin ignored Barack and did what Russians have always done. Republicans did what they have always done: ignore truth and blame Obama.
Even at home, in the face of one of the most magnificent political successes since the passage of social security, by a President whose failure was an avowed goal of the Republican Party and the House of the national legislature, even with seven million people enrolled in health care through the new marketplace, without demonstrations or riots in the streets, with no more upheaval than paid commercials and very long, calm lines of last minute enrollees, Republicans still plan to run against “Obamacare” in November. It will be an ultimate test of blame against truth, dissembling facts against critical thinking, of bias versus logic.
Did you know millions of citizens bought exchange health plans direct from the insurers rather than through the marketplace? The same plans, the same coverage and costs. The impact of Obamacare is even greater than the media has recognized. Yet the theme for the week is how many people have paid. Or how many invincibles bought coverage. Both lines of inquiry represent speculation—the real metric to watch is the cost of care; that will determine the costs of premiums since 80 percent of premiums received must be used for care. Moreover the national rate of invincibles (enrollees aged 18 to 34) will have no impact on state rates, which are what the marketplace reflects.
The few who chose not to pay for coverage going forward should not distract from the recognition that the country has reached an enormous goals that defied stacked odds.
It’s time for Democrats to stop snickering at Republican lies, and push back. Beginning with not repeating Republican talking points in every tweet and conversation, and creating progress points.
If progress points are to be successful, they must include three functions in their content.
First, be first. The first message heard is the one most remembered. It sets the tone. It drives the conversation. It leads. Be first! It works!
Second, frame the message. The President frames his ideas and responses adroitly, albeit often too late, and sometimes too little. His statement in support of gay marriage is a political classic: “It doesn’t matter who you love.” But where are the Ukrainian framed progress points? The healthcare points? Framing has to have the effect of popular songs: you hear the phrases over and over in your head even when the music is off—it is the original point of advertising.
Third, repeat the message. With the election next November, Nikki Haley has begun running commercials against her likely opponent even before he has officially filed as a candidate. Paid for by outside money, the commercial omits critical facts, but airs multiple times daily, unchallenged on facts or hypocrisy. Can Democrats really afford not to answer false attacks for weeks and months?
Fourth, don’t veer from the message. What’s your favorite Democratic message? Is the ACA “life-saving”? Is the air “fresh to breathe”? Is social security “safe”? Staying on message creates an unbreakable synergy. It matches word, idea and acts in a permanent bond. But what message have Democrats consistently given for the last four years?
Think back to the anti-war and Civil Rights movements: those slogans are a foundation of America’s values and progress. “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” “We shall overcome.” “I have a dream.” These words are a part of the American lexicon. What happened to the Democrats’ sense of the message, especially when messaging is the focus of social media?
The rules of engagement are simple. Be first! Create a hook; repeat, don’t veer. The message is the medium. Workers unite! Forward ever, back never. Get fired up! Republicans have plenty of money for the wealthy and war. Run with it! There’s no good reason to go back. Cutting the budget and services creates double trouble. Understood?
