KARL ROVE: "Deeply and Profoundly and Consistently Wrong." And What Democrats can learn.
Rove Is, to use his own terminology, "Deeply, Profoundly, and Consistently Wrong." Yet his communications and strategy have great affect on the American voter and pysche.
He is wrong on policy, but yet is able to convince much of America that the far right is correct on policy. And he is able to convince much of America that democrats, including moderate democrats, and independents (let alone liberals), are wrong. He is wrong on the facts, and again, manages to convince voters of the opposite.
Yet democrats are often seemingly unable to do the same. In addition, democrats are often misperceived, and mischaracterized, when they do have the facts on their side.
Why is that?
Part of it may have to do with understanding their opponent; that is, understanding why their opponent does what they do, and why thus they have been sucessful with American voters.
The prevalent perception among democrats, for example, is to believe that the "right wing" simply lies to and manipulates everybody. That it knows exactly what it is doing in this regard. And that it knows it is wrong.
Yet this may be a terribly self destructive, if not naive, belief. A failure to understand one's opponents can often be a huge impediment to defeating them.
Yet this same analogy may not as aptly apply to republicans, and, in particular, to the far right.
Why? Republicans, and again, in particular, the far right, may not have to understand democrats. They know what they believe, and they spin it well; successfully characterizing themselves, democrats, and the issues. And in fact, it is their misunderstsanding of democrats, in large part, that often helps them "sell" what they believe.
On the other hand, and quite in contrast, since democrats have not successfully characterized themselves, the republicans, or the issues -- let alone taken their perception of republicans or the far right and sold it to America (let alone again a harshly mischaracterized caricature even worse than the reality), it matters that they understand the right wing.
The main reasons for this are to be able to know what the right wing is doing. And, more importantly, to understand why it has reached so many people, despite, in the reapplied words of Karl Rove, being "deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong.")
Alll democrats really need to know about the power of belief, to begin to break this down, can be summarized by any number of examples, such as this one found here.
But maybe the author of that piece has his facts wrong. Maybe Rove in fact, doesn't "gush over" T.R., but instead hates him the same way he hates many democrats who have the exact same values as T.R. That would seem a whole lot more consistent.
But it is unlikely.
Why? Because the republican party, increasingly dominated by its own right and far right wing, and today spouting forth principle that it does more to undermine than uphold, has fooled itself almost as much as the American people. And it not only has mischaracterized democrats, it largely has to believe those mischaracterizations to maintain its own beliefs.
When democrats begin to recognize this (and begin to show it as well), they as a party can begin to relate the principles to people in a way that does not alienate them; that does not make voters feel that they need to "defend" their choices; that does not make voters immediately skeptical because democrats seem to tell them what to conclude, rather than why; that does not make voters think that democrats are just "playing politics;" that does not make them think, subconsiously, at least that they don't understand them (the voter) because the voter that needs to be reached (as opposed to the already committed staunch democrat) does not usually think that everyone apart from democrats is a "liar and a cheat." Most importantly, they can begin TO UNDERSTAND why so many republican messages, misleading as they are, nevertheless "resonate" with so many American voters, and thus what to pay attention to, and why.)
In fact, this type of of appealing communication is exactly what Rove achieves in that famous quote of his borrowed above, and many others. Notice also how Rove's quote, and to a lesser extent, the quotes by RNC Chair Ken Mehlman, in that short and highly misleading and destructive AP article linked above, accomplish this.
Notice, in comparison, how the quote by the DNC spokesperson, not only does nothing to refute the also highly misleading but effective quote by Mehlman, or explain why it is wrong (apparently believing that it is simply obvious, when, to the non staunch democrat, it is likely no such thing), but also accomplishes none of the objectives above. (This short AP article, and the DNC quote, and why they both matter so much is, is also discussed at bottom here, and in more depth, here. The latter piece also puts much of this in the context of the highly mischaracterized Connecticut primary race between Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman, which Lamont won yesterday by a narow margin, and which remains very relevant, as Lieberman has vowed to run as an "independent democrat.")
The far right has a mesage. It may be wrong. It may mischaracterize. But until this is shown, those messages are going to have a highly disproportionate effect on the national debate, as they have for the past six years. And in order to effectively show it, democrats must first understand it, and why it is believed.
Here are some things for the democratic party, and for democrats and independents to focus on in terms of exposing the right wing for what it is, and why it is crucial before being able to effectively communicate almost any other basic message.
He is wrong on policy, but yet is able to convince much of America that the far right is correct on policy. And he is able to convince much of America that democrats, including moderate democrats, and independents (let alone liberals), are wrong. He is wrong on the facts, and again, manages to convince voters of the opposite.
Yet democrats are often seemingly unable to do the same. In addition, democrats are often misperceived, and mischaracterized, when they do have the facts on their side.
Why is that?
Part of it may have to do with understanding their opponent; that is, understanding why their opponent does what they do, and why thus they have been sucessful with American voters.
The prevalent perception among democrats, for example, is to believe that the "right wing" simply lies to and manipulates everybody. That it knows exactly what it is doing in this regard. And that it knows it is wrong.
Yet this may be a terribly self destructive, if not naive, belief. A failure to understand one's opponents can often be a huge impediment to defeating them.
Yet this same analogy may not as aptly apply to republicans, and, in particular, to the far right.
Why? Republicans, and again, in particular, the far right, may not have to understand democrats. They know what they believe, and they spin it well; successfully characterizing themselves, democrats, and the issues. And in fact, it is their misunderstsanding of democrats, in large part, that often helps them "sell" what they believe.
On the other hand, and quite in contrast, since democrats have not successfully characterized themselves, the republicans, or the issues -- let alone taken their perception of republicans or the far right and sold it to America (let alone again a harshly mischaracterized caricature even worse than the reality), it matters that they understand the right wing.
The main reasons for this are to be able to know what the right wing is doing. And, more importantly, to understand why it has reached so many people, despite, in the reapplied words of Karl Rove, being "deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong.")
Alll democrats really need to know about the power of belief, to begin to break this down, can be summarized by any number of examples, such as this one found here.
T.R. was a great conservationist, that he was a fierce watchdog of big business, that he was an early proponent of Social Security and the minimum wage.Why is this relevant? Because,
Karl Rove gushes over him.That is worth repeating. Karl Rove "gushes" over a leader who "was a great conservationist, ... a fierce watchdog of big business...an early proponent of Social Security and the minimum wage. "
But maybe the author of that piece has his facts wrong. Maybe Rove in fact, doesn't "gush over" T.R., but instead hates him the same way he hates many democrats who have the exact same values as T.R. That would seem a whole lot more consistent.
But it is unlikely.
Why? Because the republican party, increasingly dominated by its own right and far right wing, and today spouting forth principle that it does more to undermine than uphold, has fooled itself almost as much as the American people. And it not only has mischaracterized democrats, it largely has to believe those mischaracterizations to maintain its own beliefs.
When democrats begin to recognize this (and begin to show it as well), they as a party can begin to relate the principles to people in a way that does not alienate them; that does not make voters feel that they need to "defend" their choices; that does not make voters immediately skeptical because democrats seem to tell them what to conclude, rather than why; that does not make voters think that democrats are just "playing politics;" that does not make them think, subconsiously, at least that they don't understand them (the voter) because the voter that needs to be reached (as opposed to the already committed staunch democrat) does not usually think that everyone apart from democrats is a "liar and a cheat." Most importantly, they can begin TO UNDERSTAND why so many republican messages, misleading as they are, nevertheless "resonate" with so many American voters, and thus what to pay attention to, and why.)
In fact, this type of of appealing communication is exactly what Rove achieves in that famous quote of his borrowed above, and many others. Notice also how Rove's quote, and to a lesser extent, the quotes by RNC Chair Ken Mehlman, in that short and highly misleading and destructive AP article linked above, accomplish this.
Notice, in comparison, how the quote by the DNC spokesperson, not only does nothing to refute the also highly misleading but effective quote by Mehlman, or explain why it is wrong (apparently believing that it is simply obvious, when, to the non staunch democrat, it is likely no such thing), but also accomplishes none of the objectives above. (This short AP article, and the DNC quote, and why they both matter so much is, is also discussed at bottom here, and in more depth, here. The latter piece also puts much of this in the context of the highly mischaracterized Connecticut primary race between Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman, which Lamont won yesterday by a narow margin, and which remains very relevant, as Lieberman has vowed to run as an "independent democrat.")
The far right has a mesage. It may be wrong. It may mischaracterize. But until this is shown, those messages are going to have a highly disproportionate effect on the national debate, as they have for the past six years. And in order to effectively show it, democrats must first understand it, and why it is believed.
Here are some things for the democratic party, and for democrats and independents to focus on in terms of exposing the right wing for what it is, and why it is crucial before being able to effectively communicate almost any other basic message.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home