Democrats are Dittoheads
Wed Jan 28, 2004 at 11:23:18 PM PDT
As many of you know, through the use of Google News, I have been monitoring total media coverage of every candidate since August. During that time, three campaign stories received by far the most coverage. In order, those stories were:
- John Kerry's victory in the Iowa Caucuses (1/19-1/24)
- Al Gore's endorsement of Howard Dean (12/07-12/14)
- Wesley Clark's entry into the race (9/16-9/26)
All three of these stories were very positive to the candidate in question. With the date of these three stories in mind, examine
schwa's remarkable chart that tracks the five-poll moving average of national polls on the Democratic field. What you will see in schwa's chart is that Clark moved up around ten points at the same time positive stories about the General were swamping the media. Further, you will notice that Dean also saw a roughly ten-point upswing during the news cycle when he was endorsed by Gore. Now consider Kerry's national poll movement immediately after the Iowa caucuses (All numbers taken from
polling report):
Fox News
Kerry before Iowa: 7
Kerry After Iowa: 29
Newsweek
Kerry before Iowa: 11
Kerry after Iowa: 30
Q-poll
Before: 8
After: 30
Overall, Kerry saw a national bounce of around 20 points immediately after he won Iowa. Considering what appears to be a clear correlation between massive, positive news stories and huge swings in nationwide Democratic preference in all three of these cases, I draw the following, depressing conclusion: Democrats are Dittoheads who will do whatever the Political Opinion Complex tells them to do.
In a recent diary entry,
"The Blogosphere Rebellion," I theorized that the long-term trend of pollsters becoming political consultants, consultants becoming television pundits / major newspaper columnists, and pollsters becoming television pundits / major newspaper columnists has almost erased the difference between what were at one time three distinct groups of people. The resulting connection between the three has led to the rise of what I refer to as the Political Opinion Complex. The POC has grown to hold nearly absolute sway over the way political issues, events, and campaigns are portrayed to the vast majority of the American public.
According to a very recent Pew survey, 68% of Americans still use television as their primary source of campaign news, and 15% use newspapers as their primary source (radio was at 7%, the Internet at a rapidly growing 6%). Perhaps the most disturbing thing about television's still dominant hold over campaign information is that television coverage of the campaign has dropped off sharply over the past decade. According to another recent study, in this case conducted by The Center for Media and Public Affairs, "the networks spent 5 hours and 20 minutes covering the election's preseason in 2003, a 32 percent drop in coverage from the 2000 campaign (7:49), in which both party's nominations were contested--and a 62 percent drop from 1996 (14:02), the last time only one party's nomination was contested." While television's control over the flow of political information remains as strong as ever, the amount of information television releases to the public about politics and campaigns has been greatly reduced.
It is my thesis that the tremendous reduction in campaign coverage by televised news led to extremely soft nationwide support of each of the nine candidates. The soft nature of this support is demonstrated by the wild sings in national polls following each of the three major news stories during this campaign season. By reducing overall campaign coverage and restricting the amount of information given about the candidates, networks and newspapers have softened support for all candidates to a degree never before witnessed during the primary season. This has in turn granted even greater control over the nominating process to the Political Opinion Complex, which can now completely transform the campaign by intensely focusing upon a single major story. To put it in more colorful language, in conjunction with the corporate media, the Political Opinion Complex has starved the Democratic electorate of campaign information to the point where they will eat up anything put in front of them. Whether that meal is Clark, Dean, or Kerry, the public is simply far too hungry to choose.
Sadly, this state of affairs has turned the Democratic electorate into dittoheads. We will vote however the POC tells us to vote. We jump at a resume when we are told to jump, we join a movement when we are told to join, we will accept a southern strategy when we are told to accept, and we believe in electability when we are told to believe. We will sell-out unions if we are told it will help us win. We will go to war if we think it will appeal in the south. We will abandon urban renewal if we are told it won't play in Middle America. We will stamp out volunteer movements if we are told they won't lead to corporate donations. Although it primarily exists outside and above the party, The Political Opinion Complex wields significantly more control over the Democratic Party than any institution supposedly "inside" of it.
In order to reduce the increasing control of the Political Opinion complex over our political process, we need to begin developing and strengthening institutions strong enough to counter its current influence. Specifically, we need to further develop networks where political information can be mass distributed outside of the POC's control. Not long ago, there were several such outside institutions. Unions and churches were a far more pervasive part of people's lives. Newspapers and periodicals were significantly more numerous and varied in their political outlook. Public television and radio had far larger audiences. Political parties and societies were either machines or at least overflowing with active members. All of these now weakened institutions once served as means to perform end-runs outside the control of the corporate media and the Political Opinion Complex. Engagement with the political process through means other than television was far greater. However, those institutions no longer serve as significant counter-weights to the strength of the Political Opinion Complex
Even though it appears that Dean's attempt to perform just such an end-run around the POC through the use of the netroots and the blogosphere is on the verge of failure (even though I'm not giving up), in my estimation his campaign has left a tremendous amount of hope in its wake. Over the past year, a number of counter-institutions have begun to form that can serve as a means to lessen the influence of the POC. In particular, I see no reason to believe that the phenomenal rise of the independent, left-wing blogosphere shows any signs of slowing down. As our readership grows, so will the power of the information we distribute. Secondly, Moveon.org and Meetups for the Democratic Party and Common Cause continue to increase in size. Building networks around organizations instead of individuals will undoubtedly result greater strength over the long-term. Personally, over the next year, I hope to help start a Meetup for Union Members. Sometime further down the road, I'd like to help start one for something I tentatively would like to call Americans for a More Perfect Union, based upon the ideals put forth by Jesse Jackson Jr. in his book, A More Perfect Union.
The netroots and the blogosphere are not the only solution, of course. Over the past twenty-five years, through work with evangelical churches, talk radio and television shows like the 700 Club, conservatives have created what amounts to a powerful Conservative Political Opinion Complex. While many Democrats have become dittoheads to the seemingly bi-partisan, though definitely not liberal or progressive POC, many other Americans have become dittoheads to this right-wing counter-POC. With the coming of Gore's liberal TV network and a new liberal talk radio station, perhaps we can develop a counter-POC of our own. If these ventures are successful, expect the rightwing drift in the country to slow down significantly as the number of left-wing dittoheads begins to explode.
So, there you have it. This is what I have learned over the past two weeks, and why as a Dean supporter I don't really feel all that depressed today. I think his campaign utilized resources and counter-institutions that point the way to a far more hopeful future. I believe that the record turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire can be attributed to the netroots and the blogosphere (it certainly can't be attributed to current campaign coverage). I think we have made a lot of progress since the 2002-midterms, and that in the future we will make far more.
Finally, in case you are interested, this is also the beginning of my explanation for why I was wrong in my Empirical Cattle Call projections (but oh well, every academic model for projecting the primaries was wrong too). Momentum is back in a big way, and it's because Democrats have become dittoheads to the center-right POC.
