Skip to main content

View Diary: A guide to the conservative movement in one handy chart (219 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Everyone on Kos has. (24+ / 0-)

    The voters haven't.

    The Republicans are still THERE, being a toxin.

    The scene on November 6, midnight: Barack Obama holds up newspaper reading "Romney defeats Obama" as he heads to give his second term acceptance speech.

    by alkatt on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 11:32:21 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  well, I think the only reason the Repugs are still (11+ / 0-)

      alive is because the Dems are just as incompetent and ineffectual.

      Both of today's political parties are co-dependent--neither can live without the other. For both, their only electoral strategy is "they suck even more than we do !!" Nobody votes FOR either party--everybody votes AGAINST the OTHER party.

      Which is why neither party ever offers anything new, and we never move forward.

      •  IMHO the #1 thing that neither party (7+ / 0-)

        can live without is corporate $$$$.

        But I agree that there is a co-dependent dynamic. Each side plays off the other to avoid doing anything to upset their corporate paymasters.

        "She was very young,he thought,...she did not understand that to push an inconvenient person over a cliff solves nothing." -1984

        by aggressiveprogressive on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 11:56:36 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  that is very true (4+ / 0-)

          Both parties are equally dependent upon the corporate cash flow.  I did a diary on this a few years ago that is still just as relevant today:

          http://www.dailykos.com/...

          •  Never mind corporate cash..... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jilikins, roadbear, apimomfan2

            I get emails every day from politicians all over the country, all Dems, with subject lines that get your attention about a huge issue....but it's all about solicitation for money!!  Every damn one of them.  I'm spending a lot of time today unsubscribing to those email lists.  Do your damn jobs.....stop asking for money.

            Ignorance is the curse of God; knowledge is the wing wherewith we fly to heaven. William Shakespeare

            by lutznancy on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 01:02:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Hirodog, apimomfan2

              Exactly what I have been doing.  I am SO sick of them asking for money when they haven't seen to it that our quality of life-ALL of ours-has improved.  
               So...how the hell do they expect me to have the money to give?

              I will never forget, as long as I live, the day the entire world had hope... 01/20/09

              by jilikins on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 01:08:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's Their Fault They Have a Need? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                jilikins, Sue B, Cordyc

                One of the most important moves Republicans pulled was exacerbating the need for money in order to win office. It was a much smaller matter before Reagan, but now it's huge.

                Because the need is so large every politician has to spend a huge amount of time raising a huge amount of money. That means that the rich are more important than before, and that our representatives have less time to examine proposed bills, and less time to come up with ideas of their own.

                And the money spent on campaigns goes, in the main, into the pockets of Republicans, no matter who spends it. Local Fox O&Os rake in hundreds of millions and Rupert gets a windfall. Most other media outlets are also owned by Conservatives.

                Was Citizens United decided in favor of more election spending by Liberals or Moderates? Naw. It was brought before the court by Conservatives and okayed by Conservative judges. Now campaigns require even more money.

                Why bitch at Dems sending financial appeals? They won't get elected without money.

                A Southerner in Yankeeland

                •  this part is not really true: (0+ / 0-)
                  And the money spent on campaigns goes, in the main, into the pockets of Republicans, no matter who spends it. Local Fox O&Os rake in hundreds of millions and Rupert gets a windfall. Most other media outlets are also owned by Conservatives.
                  An excerpt from my diary on corporate campaign contributions:
                  It does seem to be a common myth among DKosers that the "mainstream media" (and especially the TV Cable industry) are solidly Republican.

                  They are not.

                  The numbers:

                  Sector: Entertainment Industry as a Whole (TV, Movies, Music, Publishing)

                  1994 Elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   71
                  percentage to Repugs   29

                  2004 elections (Repugs in power)
                  percentage to Dems   69
                  percentage to Repugs   30

                  2010 elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   75
                  percentage to Repugs   24

                  Sector:  Cable TV/Satellite industry
                  1994 Elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   45
                  percentage to Repugs   55

                  2004 elections (Repugs in power)
                  percentage to Dems   56
                  percentage to Repugs   44

                  2010 elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   68
                  percentage to Repugs   32

                  Sector:  Commercial Radio/TV stations
                  1994 Elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   59
                  percentage to Repugs   41

                  2004 elections (Repugs in power)
                  percentage to Dems   42
                  percentage to Repugs   57

                  2010 elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   52
                  percentage to Repugs   48

                  Sector:  Television Production Companies
                  1994 Elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   79
                  percentage to Repugs   20

                  2004 elections (Repugs in power)
                  percentage to Dems   82
                  percentage to Repugs   17

                  2010 elections (Dems in power)
                  percentage to Dems   80
                  percentage to Repugs   20

                  The entire media industry, as a whole, bucks the general corporate trend, and, as I pointed out earlier for the Hollywood movie industry, consistently supports Democrats every election.

                  But there are some interesting sub-stories here.

                  In newspaper/book publishing, the largest contributor, News Corp (Rupert Murdoch's company), gave over three times as much as the second-largest contributor, but split its donations almost evenly, with 54% to the Dems and 46% to the Repugs. All the rest of the top ten contributors, however, were fiercely partisan, with seven of them giving at least 70% of their money to Dems (and four of those giving 100% of their money to Dems), and the remaining 2 giving 93-100% of their money to Repugs. Of the top 20 Congressmen to receive money from the newspaper/book publishing industry, 19 were Democrats.

                  In cable/satellite industry, 4 of the top 5 companies all split their donations, with Dems getting between 57 and 67%. Time-Warner, number four on the list, split 57-43 for the Dems. News Corp, Rupert Murdoch's company, ranked 14th on the list, and split its donations 55-45 for the Dems. Yes, that's right--the company that owns Fox News gave over half its political contributions in 2009-2010, to Democrats.

                  Of the top 10 Congressional recipients of cable/satellite industry contributions, 8 are Dems; of the top 20, 13 are Dems.

                  So, while lots of Kossacks like to yell about the "conservative manistream media", the fact remains that where it really matters--in the bank account--the media are solidly Democratic.

                  •  Yeah, But (0+ / 0-)

                    Thanks for the data, though I find them a bit difficult to understand and am disappointed they are unsourced.

                    A few very significant points:

                    It's impossible for me to look at the major media and say they favor Dems. To my eye they clearly favor Repubs. Or, more precisely, they favor advertisers who are Repubs.

                    Many "Liberals" in any glamor industry are people who are strong supporters of things such as gay rights, choice, voting rights, soup kitchens, etc. but on the economic side eagerly support anything that promises to make them money.

                    Almost all the major cable company CDEOs/
                    Founders/Owners are right-wing, either of the Libertarian or Republican variety.

                    Many donations are to specific people on specific committees.

                    and the most important point....

                    I wouldn't say that "where it really matters" is in donations but rather in the jobs they do, which is fronting for corporate Republicanism.

                    There is no longer a "Chinese Wall" between Sales and Programming. Promotions into management are from the Sales side, and Sales are very corporate/Republican oriented.

                    Kossacks are correct in yelling against the corporate Republican media.

                    A Southerner in Yankeeland

                    •  the contributions speak for themselves (0+ / 0-)

                      (shrug)

                      And I disagree that "the mainstream media" are ideologically motivated.  I think you peg it better when you note: "eagerly support anything that promises to make them money". The media are selling a product that people want to buy.  That product is "political viewpoints", and selling those is no different than selling soap or corn flakes. I don't think people like Rush Limbaugh or Michelle Malkin or Glenn Beck even themselves believe half the things they say--it's just a product that they sell, and they laugh all the way to the bank at the rubes who buy it.  If more people wanted to hear a liberal or progressive viewpoint, I doubt that Fox News would hesitate a second to fire its entire staff and hire Michael Moore instead. It's all about the benjamins.

                      And I think we all severely overestimate the influence and power of "the conservative media". They just preach to the choir (and are mostly ineffectual at it).

                •  Yes, Southerner, I remember the day... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  GingerR, debocracy

                  when we had an "equal time" provision for all media (ok, equal space for written).  That provision was sunsetted out when Reagan refused to renew it, and IMO democracy died that day.

            •  What are they supposed to do? (0+ / 0-)

              As long as we don't get the rules of the game changed, Democrats have to compete for the almighty dollar.   Are you suggesting that they just give up and let the GOP have it all?  So,  because the GOP has bought themselves a new system and rigged the game, Democrats should simply refuse to play?  Nice thought in some alternate universe, but that wont win elections.  Its our job to keep pushing for change in the system and while a lot of Democrats are rolling in campaign contributions, both personal and corporate,  there are many more of them willing to embrace the needed changes than those across the aisle.  You can change things when Democrats are in control or you can support regressive policies and slip back into the 1930's.  Imagine how much you are going to like a GOP controlled House, Senate and Administration given the current crop of GOP politicians.   The rational Statesmen are gone, kicked out or given up, except for a hand full who are close to retiring.  What remains are frightening indeed.  

            •  Money is the Catch 22 of politics. (0+ / 0-)

              If there were any way to get the message out and get out the vote WITHOUT money, politicians would not need to ask for money.  The reason Democrats, and progressive organizations in general, have to ask so much is that too many of those who can AFFORD to give large amounts give the money to Republicans and to theocratic/plutocratic organizations, while the many supporters progressives have CANNOT afford to give enough to counter the conservatives.

              And of course, the conservatives, who can raise funds so easily, do not WANT to change the laws to make money, especially the dark money they live on, less important, because "fairness" is not in their value system; their value is for THEIR side to have all the advantages and to be able to shut out everyone ELSE.

      •  Really true, Lenny Flank, but what I can't under- (0+ / 0-)

        stand...is that the Green Party doesn't have more support from Progressives, who seem to cling obsessively to the Dems as if "they suck even more than we do" is a viable platform and a reasonable way to govern.  It is a massive undertaking, and there aren't enough Progressives in total, to actually win a Presidential election by ourselves, but a strong surge of support for the Greens would bring to Progressive values the surge of strength we need to get some important work done by elected Dems with their tails on fire.

        •  Obvious answer (0+ / 0-)

          Because they cannot win national elections or local ones for that matter under the current gerrymandered system.  That doesn't mean they don't have a seat at the table and have a profound influence.  They do and thank goodness for them,  but we are talking about winning elections here, aren't we?  Imagine how much voice the Greens will have in an all Republican controlled Government.  Kiss the gains made so far goodbye.  I give to Green causes, but I vote for Democrats and encourage them to listen to the Greens as much as possible when it comes to policy.  I want progressives to win elections even if some are not quite as progressive as I would hope for.  Pretty sure I'm better off with something rather than nothing.  But then I'm just an old  liberal grandmother, living in a very red state,  who has been playing this game a very long time.    

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site