At AlterNet, Joshua Holland writes about FireDogLake’s mode of attacks on health care reform and Dems in Washington generally. Holland expresses my own views on the matter, which is that disagreement isn’t the problem. It’s dishonest disagreement that’s the problem.
A big reason I started blogging in the first place is that the nation’s political discourse, as conducted by mass media, had degenerated into one lie on top of another. Instead of frank, factual discussion of issues, we got political hacks bashing their opponents with any disingenuous talking point they could think up. The nadir of this was the debate we weren’t able to have about invading Iraq, because any attempt at informed discussion was shouted down by Bush Administration goons shrieking that we had to get Saddam now now now. Mushroom clouds. WMDs. Gassing his own people (15 years before).
The Right came to dominate American politics because they became brilliant at exploiting people’s ignorance of issues to mislead them, and mass media were all too accommodating. You might remember that one of the first leftie blogs to cut through the noise was the late Media Whores Online. It was thrilling to see someone, finally, call bullshit on all political “news.”
While enacting progressive legislation is an important goal, to me the bigger goal has always been to heal our political culture and find a way to allow Americans to have factual, adult, honest discussions about important issues that don’t turn into partisan Punch and Judy shows. Progressivism ultimately is about citizens using their own government to improve the quality of their lives. I sincerely think that most Americans make sensible, and even progressive, decisions about issues if they understand them.
That’s why it’s so discouraging to see lefties fall into the same exploit-the-ignorance habits of the Right. Joshua Holland says that’s what FDL is doing. He criticizes an ad FDL put out —
My problem with the ad, which appears below, is its dishonesty.
Its take-away is a big, fat lie; the FDLers, counting on people’s ignorance of some rather complicated health-care proposals, are intentionally misleading their readers. I don’t have a problem with going after Obama and the Dems with a certain amount of ferocity, but it’s saddening when ostensibly liberal people try to score political points — or earn a little street-cred — by muddying some already murky waters in order to appeal to people’s emotions rather than their intellect.
He goes on to explain in detail how the ad is dishonest, which it is. He concludes,
All this does is further confuse people about what’s actually on the table and further the narrative that there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference who’s in power or what their ideological leanings might be. It just stokes generalized anti-governmentalism rather than educating the public on the specifics of the policy debate so that they can stand up for their own interests. It’s patronizing.
Exactly.
I get it that lots of progressives are bitterly disappointed at how the health care bills turned out. Really, you don’t have to explain it to me. I’m disappointed too. And I absolutely agree that we need to speak up about that and keep pushing the Dems to the left. But how we do that make a huge difference. Digby writes,
Many people believe that the only thing Democrats understand is pain and so the thing that will change this dynamic will be to deliver them a loss of their majority and perhaps the presidency to show the consequences of failure to fulfill the progressive agenda. That certainly sounds right, except you can’t ever know exactly what lesson will be taken from this sort of pain and if history is any guide, the likeliest one is the simplest and most obvious: they lost because people preferred what the other side had to offer.
That is exactly how it will be interpreted, folks. And if Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts Senate race tomorrow, media and the beltway crowd will interpret it to mean Dems have gone too far to the left, and the moral they will take away is to become less progressive, not more. The citizens of Massachusetts don’t see it that way, but the rest of the nation will be told Coakley lost because President Obama’s agenda is too ambitious and too progressive.
And that meme will take hold and become political conventional wisdom faster than you can say “individual mandate.” Trust me; if Brown wins, any chance we might have had to push the health care reform legislation further left before the final vote will be gone. We’ll be lucky if it’s not entirely scrapped and replaced with a bill written entirely by Republicans and Blue Dogs. Or else health care reform will be shoved aside for another 15 years.
I agree entirely, but if she gets elected isn’t the message to Democrats that the voters approve of the Democratic Party’s progress and procedure? And isn’t that the wrong message?
Many claim that the real sentiment is anti-incumbent, and I suspect that is accurate. I am certainly anti-incumbent. I intend to vote in my primary, and I will vote against Susan Davis even though she has only cast one single vote in the House that I disagreed with. Normally I would overwhelmingly support her with a record like that, but I am going to vote against the incumbent at every opportunity this year.
Unfortunately, yes, that will tend to be a Republican vote and it may put some Republicans in office if everyone did that. Republicans might well think that the voters liked their policies in such an event, but Democrats are sure to think that we like their message if we keep returning them to office and I, for one, do not.
I agree entirely, but if she gets elected isn’t the message to Democrats that the voters approve of the Democratic Party’s progress and procedure? And isn’t that the wrong message?
I disagree with the idea that the purpose of an election is to send a message, especially a message that is open to interpretation. The purpose of an election is to elect the person listed on the ballot who will more likely bring about progress on the issues the voter cares about. In the case of Coakley, it may be that she’s an empty skirted suit and the Massachusetts Dems were idiots to put her on the ballot. I don’t know that much about her. But by all accounts she would more likely vote in favor of progressive legislation than would Brown.
“but Democrats are sure to think that we like their message if we keep returning them to office and I, for one, do not.”
So you are going to return the Republicans to office and that will reeeeeely learn ’em.
Statements like this from Bill H – seriously delivered – make me think that the one change we need in elections is not campaign finance reform – but an IQ test before the prospective voter is allowed to select from the candidates. Bill H is proof we would lose some liberals but I am convinced more conservatives then liberals would drop by the wayside.
If Bill H had said the incumbent is a crook – I can’t vote for him/her in the primary or the general, I could respect that vote, but he said he AGREES with all but one vote and wants to toss the incumbent ANYWAY on principle. WHAT bleepin’ principle???? I’m pissed so I am gonna shoot my own foot!
I have said before and I will repeat until Barbara tosses me as an ill-manered guest – It’s a PROCESS. You examine TRENDS. If you are on a diet and you lose 4 pounds, but your goal was 8 pounds, do you quit the diet? (and go back on chips and beer) If legislation is going the right direction (left) – and it’s not enough or fast enough, I’m gonna bitch and moan – and take it and run. Because progress is progress – demanding everything or nothing usually gets you nothing.
To my mind, the problem with the Establishment Democrats is that, for decades now, they’ve been buying the idea that the way to win was to act more like a Republican, just as that triangulating DLCer Bill Clinton did. A huge part of their resistance to standing strong on progressive policies has been that doing so would keep them from tacking toward the “center” (i.e. right) come election time.
Finally, after Obama was elected, some of them are beginning to believe that maybe, just maybe, they could actually support a policy that was (admittedly barely) to the left of Republican-lite, without losing their seats.
Letting a Republican win will only convince them that they were mistaken, and that their first instinct, that people want Republicans, is right, and re-train them to their bad habits. The last thing these timid, fearful people will think is “Oh, I should have been MORE outside my comfort zone, and been MORE unlike the Republicans.”
Have the people at FireDogLake never watched the Dog Whisperer? You don’t cure an abused, hostile dog with more beating and negative reinforcement.
Letting a Republican win will only convince them that they were mistaken, and that their first instinct, that people want Republicans, is right, and re-train them to their bad habits. The last thing these timid, fearful people will think is “Oh, I should have been MORE outside my comfort zone, and been MORE unlike the Republicans.â€
Yep, I think that’s how it is.
“That’s why it’s so discouraging to see lefties fall into the same exploit-the-ignorance habits of the Right. ”
Except this is what we’ve tried to do. This is what at least to some extent, Obama has tried to do. And it doesn’t matter. Republicans are going to ride their crazy to victory in November. At this point we don’t have time anymore. Stuff like climate change is now to urgent to put off. If we have to lie to people to win and save their asses for the next few centuries then I don’t really care anymore about teaching Americans to think honestly about issues. When times are good they can’t be bothered and when times are bad they are concerned about themselves.
You state two problems in your post. First, how do educate the voter. No, first, is how do you educate the citizen. American Idol, America’s Got Talent, Survivor, The Biggest Loser. That is all the vast heartland knows. Yeah, they want to have a job, but the bulk of them cannot see a connection between getting an education and having a job, perhaps with benefits.
I have seen a big increase in people doing things that are against their self interest.
The second problem is tied to the first – ignorance. When one has not learned how to think critically, then one will not be able to tell the difference between a bogus argument and a factual one.
Being anti-incumbent is silly. First, in Massachusetts, Coakley is not the incumbent. Kennedy, the incumbent, is dead. However, incumbents are actually sometimes the best for your interests because it takes years to get in a position to really make changes in the House and Senate for the constituents. A freshman congressperson seldom has the ability to achieve a lot because of the backroom deals that usually need to get done; and, because seniority is how these institutions work. Now, the country probably would improve if we could get rid of some of these incumbent Republicans (Inhofe, King, Coburn, etc.) However, I just don’t understand people who supposedly were alive during these last eight years when the country nearly became a third world country under the leadership of a Republican administration and Republican majorities in the House and Senate. I agree wholeheartedly with Holland and Barbara. It doesn’t matter who the lies come from. Health care reform is needed desperately in this country. There are two really good things in these bills that make passing the bill worthwhile. The pre-existing conditions change and the anti-trust part make this a worthwhile endeavor. And, it is something that can be built on.
Chief
1) How is Massachusetts the “vast heartland”?
2) How much of a connection is there between education and having a job with benefits? More and more education is getting you debt and a 4-year is becoming a meaningless credential. Graduate degrees are what Bachelor degrees were but are even less affordable.
Perhaps Primary Elections are the place to send a message? Bill H’s good rep sees 20% going to a more liberal primary opponent, then sees those same voters join in her general election campaign as volunteers that engage with her staff about why they voted against her in the primary while working hard to reelect her in the general … might that be an understandable message?
Maha,
Is MNPundit a troll? His #2 is a circular statement.
MNPundit – I noted and quoted a statistic (fact) from NPR to my kids last week re unemployment. In the current Great Recession, people with degrees are in the 5% range – people with high school degrees (or less) are in the 15+% range. Perhaps you would arm yourself with more facts and less groundless and false opinion.
We would all like ideas on how education can be more affordable, but not from you MNPundit, until you spend some time reading on the subject. Where there are good ideas, they arent being plucked outchass, which is where you seem to be going for yours.
Well, we shouldn’t be here in the first place. We didn’t just shoot ourselves in the foot; we blew our whole damned leg off by once again, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and allowing what should have been an easy win for a democrat in a solidly blue state end up a potential victory for far right wingnut tea bagger, no less.
Well, in many ways, there isn’t a dime’s worth difference between them. Like with the banks. Obama has given the banksters everything they want. Bailouts galore. Huge bonuses. A whole lot of folks who should be criminally prosecued aren’t. Tell me, how is that different from Bush?
Sure, Obama is great on cleantech and net neutrality, but the financial crisis is by far more important. He doesn’t have bad advisers or not understand what’s happening. Rather, he deliberately and constantly backs the banks against everyone else.
What is happening is that a populist storm is building strength. There’s was one in the 1890’s and it accomplished quite a lot. And had little use for either major party. Ral change usually does come from the fringes.
Mr. Hughes,
You answered my question. Thanks.
Public ignorance isn’t going to go away. The only way to make political headway against it is to find ways to exploit ignorance. The right wing understands this and wins elections because of it. The center (there is no American left) does not understand this and always loses because of it.
I’m getting tired of all of this.
Bill H., WHF are you talking about?
“…and I will vote against Susan Davis even though she has only cast one single vote in the House that I disagreed with. Normally I would overwhelmingly support her with a record like that, but I am going to vote against the incumbent at every opportunity this year.”
So, if your wife, or significant other, make the spaghetti too well done, and not at all denti, the way you like it, you gonna vote him/her out of their “orafice?”
I repeat. WTF?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?
maha,
Next time, I won’t shoot to aim for my foot. I may give my head a try.
Oyyyyyy!
No, I’m not a troll chief. My point is, education costs more and more and gets you less and less with more debt. It’s usually better to get an education that not, but a four year degree is not he road to success it was 30 years ago.
” but a four year degree is not he road to success it was 30 years ago.”
No, MNPundit, it’s not. But ignorance is still the same road to failure it’s always been. As you have so eloqently shown.
What gives? why is it that people are being shouted down as trolls and ignoramus’s for expressing themselves in a non aggressive manner. What’s with the unwarranted hostility?
Everybody settle down. That’s an order.
A wife making spaghetti is not a politician representing the public. Congress as a whole has 19% approval, but “my representative” has 89% approval. We need an IQ test all right, but it’s for people who say that “Congress is terrible, but my guy is great.” We keep reelecting the same people to Congress because “my guy is just fine, it’s all the other guys that are bad” and expect better results. Nothing is going to change as long as Republicans can claim that Democrats are the problem and vice versa. We need an election that dumps incumbents of both parties in large numbers. We won’t get that when low-information Democratic voters are saying “What, you want to put a Republican into office?” and “We need to keep Democrats in office,” even when the Democrats who are in office are governing for their own retention of power instead of the well being of the nation’s people.
Bill H — the problem with “dump the incumbent” sentiments is that you assume the problem in inherent in the people in Washington, and I think the problem is in the system. But another way, you may think the incumbents are too much like turnips, so you elect some apples. But when you send the apples to Washington, the system will, sooner or later, turn them into turnips. You need to look beyond just the people taking up space in Congress and look to the system itself, and why it has gotten so unresponsive.
If Coakley loses, I will profusely apologize to you in my blog.
But that ain’t gonna happen. The Republicans have no clout left at the ballot box, and are playing scorched earth politics in the Senate. Nothing less than a full response by this administration has been warranted, but instead they play compromise games with tricksters.
I do not perceive any serious effort to undermine the Democratic party, just disgruntlement in the ranks over a discredited theory of engagement. Many of us, myself most certainly included, thought hiring a pit bull like Rahm showed Obama was serious about change. Instead we’ve all learned, painfully, that Rahm is there as an enforcer for all the bad actors pressuring this administration to protect banksters, liars, warmongers and frauds.
I am a Democrat. I’m not threatening to break ranks and frankly, I really don’t know where all this carping about disloyalty comes from. Democrats argue with each other. It makes us a better party.
Maybe FDL ran a bad ad. I do not feel discredited because people who are not me ran one ad you say is disingenuous.
Sometimes you really do have to break things before you can fix them. I would like to see us break Wall Street’s hold on Congress, and then vote on all this again in 2011. Nothing in the current bills will take effect before 2014 anyway, so most of this is moot.
“No, MNPundit, it’s not. But ignorance is still the same road to failure it’s always been. As you have so eloqently shown.”
Let’s have a little contest shall we? How have I failed? Of what am I ignorant? Do you deny that for some people, it’s more cost-effective and monetarily beneficial in the long run to learn a trade than enroll in a 4-year Bachelor’s degre?