 |
|
|
The Bismark Tribune yesterday ran a story about Fargo radio talk-show host Ed Schultz, who may be tapped by Democratic leadership to become the left's answer to conservative talk-radio. Now before I proceed, if anyone you know is willing to bet that Mr. Schultz, or anyone else the Dem's tap to lead this effort will succeed, bet the house against. Heck, if you are a gambling man and will take my advice, you will empty the savings account, cash in the kids' college fund, pawn your wife's diamond ring (you know, the one handed down from her great-grandmother) and bet it all that this new network doesn't even turn a profit, ever. "The Democrats are getting the tar beat out of them constantly by Limbaugh and Hannity, and they feel they don't have a platform," Schultz said in the article. "There's this conservative mantra that's being jammed down the throats of the American people, and the other side of the story is not being told." In two sentences Ed Schultz showed not only why the new network is doomed to failure, but also why the Democrats will get clobbered in 2004: They just don't get it. Schultz says that Democrats "don't feel they have a platform." What he means is; 'How can we win if the only thing people hear is Limbaugh and Hannity?' This is akin to what we heard following the butt-whipping they took in the mid-terms. "We weren't able to get our message out," we were told. What it implies is that if they can just reach the people, they will be successful. He then goes on to say; "There's this conservative mantra being rammed down the throats of the American people, and the other side of the story is not being told." This statement is made to impart the following idea: the playing field is not level. We know the left believes this when we see their support of the Campaign Finance Reform bill, which limits money that can be spent and ads that may be run (interpretation: Speech) and the resurrection of support for the Fairness Doctrine (which could change the landscape of talk radio overnight). The message here from Schultz is that if the left is granted the exposure their adversaries enjoy, they will share at least the same success. This thinking also in some way belies the left's disdain for the American people. Their belief is that the people will take what you give them, and believe what you tell them. Since conservatives are the only ones talking on radio right now, that is what people are buying, and what they are believing. The problem with the Democratic message is not that it has not gotten out, or that the people are not hearing it because the conservatives have hijacked the airways, or that it does not exist (as some conservatives assert). The problem with the Democrat message is that it is being rejected by the American people. The two most recent major elections show this. In the mid-term elections of 2002 the Democrats lost big-time, and don't let anyone tell you different. It is one thing to lose Senate seats, it is another to lose House seats. It is quite another to do both, especially after having been so close in the presidential race of 2000. In the recent California Gubernatorial race they were beaten again, badly. Some said it is because they failed to put up a viable candidate, like Fienstein, for example, to face Arnold. This may be true, but I believe they could have run a reincarnated John Kennedy and lost. The Democrat candidate did not lose the California election, the Democrat message did. The Democrats lost that race because the people perceived their policies to be failures in California. This holds true for the mid-terms of 2002, especially the Mondale race. It is interesting to note that one of the few victories for the Dems in the mid-terms; Landrieu's win in Louisiana, featured no stumping by big-name Democrats during the campaign. Landrieu won by distancing herself from the national Democratic party. There is another idea implied by Ed Schultz in the two sentences above, one that is shared by the Democratic party; tactics win elections, not ideas. Mr. Schultz, like the Democrats after California, and the mid-terms, speak about how they fail to get the message out, how they are losing the radio battle because the other side controls the dial, or elections because a popular candidate who says all the right things was running, who had more money, or dragged down California. They imply that the victories by Republicans happened because of how the race was run, not what the race meant to the people. The Bill Clinton paradigm is alive and well in the Democrat party. It states that if you tactically outmaneuver your opponent you will win every time. What the Dems fail to recognize is that Bill Clinton did well because the American people want to believe their President when he speaks to them, and they want to believe that what he wants is best for their country. Because of this, they will give their president the benefit of the doubt all day long. That is why Clinton's popularity rating went up when he was attacked, and that is why he survived all the scandal. Nixon could have done so too, if he was willing to hang in there. But that deference ends at the White House front door. And the tactics that served Bill Clinton as president are not working for the Democratic party now. The Democrats should observe the trend of the last two major elections and be inspired to change their message, seeing that it has gotten out, and is being rejected. America is a changed nation since 9-11, more sober and serious, and a Democrat looking to win the White House by attacking the President on the war in Iraq will fail. In fact, no Democrat will win who is deemed in any way to be soft on defense. The tactics of Clinton will not work against a President who has taken up a new tone, and kept it. After approximately six months of the nine campaigning, "Any Other Democrat" is still leading, last I checked. The message is getting out, it is just not resonating. The American people want to feel like we as a nation are united against our enemies, not one that is divided against itself. The people want a government that works, not one that is stalled from posturing and politics. If the Democrats wish to succeed in 2004, they will have to change their message. However, they appear to be doing anything but. For this reason I say, if you are a gambling man take my advice. Bet the house on Bush by a landslide. Comments: editor@johnnypnews.com
|