Skip to main content

Since forever, the Republican message is STILL "Dems take your money and give it to black people." Doesn't change. Doesn't have to. It's OUR fault.

Since Forever

I am not young. I remember when Nixon campaigned with his racially divisive "Southern Strategy."  Nixon campaigned on "crime" - fear of black people - and on the claim that Dmeocrats take "your" money and give it to black people.  It worked.

It worked for Reagan, too, when he talked about "welfare queens" and "welfare Cadillacs."  Here is part of a Reagan campaign stump speech,

"She has eighty names, thirty addresses, twelve Social Security cards and is collecting veteran's benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. And she is collecting Social Security on her cards. She's got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000."
(Please read what Terrance Heath has to say about welfare queens in, Romney And Ryan: The Right Kind Of "Welfare Queens".)

HW Bush used the infamous Willie Horton ad. Watch it with the sound off.

Bush II beat back John McCain in the primaries by circulating stories that he had "fathered a black child" and "terrorists." (But correct me if I'm wrong, Bush II didn't appear to use race against Gore, instead preempting potential attacks on his own character and honesty by hammering Gore's "character" and making him out to be a liar - both with the help of the media. His later use of "terrorists" (brown people) is another story entirely...)


So I'm going to go way out on a limb here.  I predict that Republicans will use race and other terribly divisive tactics to distract us from the real situation -- the draining of the wealth of 99% of us and the country for the benefit of an already-wealthy few -- in the 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020 and every campaign after that.  They will say that "Democrats take your money and give it to black people."  They will campaign against "union thugs" and "union bosses" and say paying fair wages "hurts business" and we need to be more "business friendly." They will say "government takes money out of the economy" and helping each other "makes people dependent."  They will say "cutting taxes increases government revenue."  They will say a lot of nonsense, and their policies when enacted will always, always benefit an already-wealthy few at the expense of the rest of us, our economy, our country and our planet.  

They will say all kinds of stuff to keep We, the People from seeing what is in front of our faces.

That is who they are and that is what they do.

Unless we do something about it.

Look Where We Are & At What Romney Is Doing

Look where we are: Deregulation pretty much destroyed the economy. Tax cuts have partially defunded the government's ability to empower and protect We, the People. The 1% and their giant corporations get so much of the benefits of our economy now. The climate is obviously getting worse and worse, already risking crop failures, incredible heat waves and terribly destructive storms. And with all of this going on one party blocks efforts to improve things, so they can campaign saying nothing is getting done.  Yet with all that going on, the election so far is all coming down to billionaires spending hundreds of millions to run ads that say Obama is taking your money and giving it to black people.

Look what Romney is doing!  He is running ads that come pretty close to the "welfare queen" messaging, pretty much saying that Democrats take your money and give it to black people.  He is running ads about Medicare that pretty much say the same thing.  And now he is even going "birther." Thomas Edsall explains today in the NY Times, in Making The Election About Race,

The Republican ticket is flooding the airwaves with commercials that develop two themes designed to turn the presidential contest into a racially freighted resource competition pitting middle class white voters against the minority poor.

... The racial overtones of Romney’s welfare ads are relatively explicit. Romney’s Medicare ads are a bit more subtle. ... Obamacare, described in the Romney ad as a “massive new government program that is not for you,” would provide health coverage to a population of over 30 million that is not currently insured: 16.3 percent of this population is black; 30.7 percent is Hispanic; 5.2 percent is Asian-American; and 46.3 percent (less than half) is made up of non-Hispanic whites.

... The Romney campaign is willing to disregard criticism concerning accuracy and veracity in favor of  “blowing the dog whistle of racism” – resorting to a campaign appealing to racial symbols, images and issues in its bid to break the frustratingly persistent Obama lead in the polls, which has lasted for the past 10 months.

Once again, Republicans are saying, "Democrats take your money and give it to black people."

And just like they do every time it works they take our money and give it to rich people instead.

It's Our Fault

Here's the thing.  This is our fault.  Fool me once, shame on you.  We were fooled once, when Nixon did it.  Shame on Nixon.  But ...  We were fooled twice, when Reagan did it.  We were fooled again and again, and apparently never caught on that this is what they do.  

And if this is what they do, we should have taken steps after, maybe, the fifth or sixth or seventh or eighth time?    This is our fault.

WHY are Republicans still able to use race in their campaigns to deflect attention from their ongoing campaign to turn the wealth and management of our country over to the 1%?  Because we have not organized ourselves to reach out to regular people around the country and help them to understand what is happening to them.  Instead we (progressives) have largely focused our on changing things through elections.  But we have not done the hard work between elections to set the stage for elections.  We have not been very good at reaching out to tens and tens of millions of regular people and helping them to understand and appreciate the benefits to them of a progressive approach to solving our problems.

I mean, a lot of us do get this and try.  This is a big part of what Campaign for America's Future does - or tries to do with the very limited resources it has.  But a real national, between-elections, ongoing -- decades-long -- campaign takes real resources, facilities, coordination, supplies, management, researchers, writers, talkers, technologists, and the rest.  And that takes real money.  The kind of money conservatives have been willing to put into such and effort, and progressives have not.

Let's Finally Do Something About It

When are we going to recognize that this is what they do, and do something about it?  They use race.  They divide us.  They make shit up, and spend millions and millions on blasting their made-up shit into people's brains.  Then they enrich the 1% at the expense of the rest of us, and use part of that to do it more.  This is what they do.  And very little is done to counter it.  (Some say the problem is, "democracy does not have an advertising budget.")

What if we had started 4 years ago to get ready for this campaign of lies and division, knowing full well that they are going to use race and lies and the rest against We, the People? What if we had started then to reach and educate millions and millions of working people, bring them together, help them see the bigger picture?  What if we had reached out to millions of disaffected white voters and explained directly to them, in language that reaches them, with stories that resonate with them, so they would be ready for it when they are told "Democrats take your money and give it to black people," and why believing it hurts them.

What if we did this between elections, and kept doing it after elections, and explained and reinforced the concepts of democracy so that people's understanding and appreciation of democracy and what it really means increased year after year after year?  

What if we had started doing this 8 years ago?  12 years ago? After Nixon's election?   What if we had started to dedicate a percentage of progressive-aligned funding and organizing toward a centrally organized, well-funded campaign of reaching regular people and explaining the harm conservatives are doing, and the benefits to them of democracy and a We, the People approach to our mutual problems?

How well would their campaign of racism and lies and division  work, if we had done that?  How well will it work if we do it.

What would it have done for the goals of environmentalists if we had put serious money into a coordinated, values-based approach that helped people understand and appreciate the meaning and benefits to them of truly honoring We, the People "we are in this together" democracy over the prevailing corporate/conservative, Randian, "you should be on your own"?

What would it have done for the goals of labor unions if we had used this approach?

What would it have done for the goals of consumer attorneys if we had used this approach?

What would it have done for the goals of Medicare-For-All advocates if we had used this approach?

And what could it do for all of these if we started today?

A Fight Back Strategy

Research & Development, and Action: What we need is a major, coordinated, funded, national project dedicated to researching the ways the 1% manipulates us, and developing strategics for overcoming them.  This project also needs a national action arm that takes the research and strategies out to the country and continues this work for as long as it takes.

Just think about this, think about changing your orientation from election cycle to outside of the election cycle, ongoing, as-long-as-it-takes strategies.  And mostly, please help and continue to help fund organizations that work outside of elections to help make these changes, so that progressive candidates and policy initiatives have fertile ground in which to do well!

Of course, this kind of work is a big part of what Campaign for America's Future does - or tries to do with the very limited resources it has.  You can and should help us with this, and you can do that right now by visiting this page. If you can give $3 right now, that helps.  Seriously, if everyone reading this just gave $3 (or more) it would help.  

And this is not a selfish appeal so I can get a raise (although it can't hurt).  There are a number of other organizations that are seriously working on this kind of approach.  You can also give a donation to Center for American Progress here, or to the National Council of La Raza here, or to the Economic Policy Institute here, Media Matters here, to the Center for Community Change here, to Progressive Congress here, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights here, to People For the American Way here, and there are so many other organizations that are working in their own way to help.   (I'll add them as they read this and write to yell at me for leaving them out.)

There is a (somewhat out of date) page on funding progressive infrastructure here and a (somewhat out of date) list of progressive infrastructure organizations here.  

We really need for progressives to understand this need, and the difference between this and election campaign contributions.  Think about it, and help spread the word.  Help fund it, and help others understand this need.  We can beat back the conservative machine by building a machine of our own that is strong enough to do the job.  This takes money.

And to keep that machine answerable to US, we have to fund it democratically, with each of us stepping up and contributing what we can.  It has to be lots of people giving small and medium amounts, not depending on a few large donors.  ANY organization or candidate is going to dance with the ones that brung 'em, so WE have to bring them to the dance together.  Go give $3 or $10 or $100 to any of those organizations now, and keep doing it, and get others to do it.


A dollar donated to an effort like this now is like a dollar donated again and again to each and every progressive issue campaign and candidate from now on, except that the dollar is amplified.  This is because doing the work now makes elections and policy battles so much easier and less expensive.

Conservatives have developed a "brand" and their candidates and policy initiatives ride that brand like a surfer surfs a wave.  They just hop on the wave and attach themselves or their issue.  So much of the things we have to spend so much money on are already covered by their infrastructure of like-minded organizations, so for each candidate and policy initiative they have to spend so much less!  ALL of their candidates are helped by the central branding effort.

Progressive-oriented candidates and policy initiatives start almost from scratch, and so it is tremendously expensive to get them elected or passed.  We have to raise tremendous sums to do the things that conservatives have ready-to-go.  And each of our candidates have to each raise that money, on their own, just to overcome the things conservatives already have in place - for all of them.  One dollar spent on a core branding effort could have the same effect for all of our candidates and policy initiatives as the more-than-one-dollar spent for EACH candidate or policy initiative at election time to overcome it.

So help out, OK?

P.S. Here is a talk I gave on this subject in 2004, titled "On Our Own?" that talked about how the corporate right works between elections to market  their ideology, and suggesting that we should try a similar outside-the-election-cycle approach.

Here is a talk I gave to an education organization in 2007 titled, "We're All In This Together" that described how the right uses the Overton Window to move public attitudes,

What can we, as supporters of public education, do about this?

The supporters of public education must join with their natural allies -- the trial lawyers and the environmentalists and reproductive rights organizations and others and begin to talk to the public with a COMMON message that says WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER because we are a COMMUNITY. Only after people come to understand and appreciate this philosophy of community again, will they begin to understand and appreciate the value of public schools.

... The Right pushes an ugly message that we are each on our own, out for ourselves to get what we can, in a dog-eat-dog world. But in truth, we are really ARE all in this together, not only as being on the receiving end of similar attacks, but also because we can work together to help each other. We can work to counter the Right’s message by restoring the public’s understanding and appreciation of COMMUNITY and the value of responsible government.

How can we do this?

As I’m sure you know, frame and message development and testing are complex and require skilled professionals. Messaging efforts on behalf of public education will have the greatest effect if linked to broad frames that are developed across sectors, frames that support the value of community and government. And the messaging that supports these values will be most effective if it is delivered by multiple voices, third-party voices that are not strongly identified with public education and other interest groups. It must be coordinated with a long-term strategy.

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America's Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture.  I am a Fellow with CAF.

Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    karmsy, Chi, breakingranks, puakev, vahana

    Seeing The Forest -- Who is our economy FOR, anyway? Twitter: @dcjohnson

    by davej on Mon Aug 27, 2012 at 05:45:34 PM PDT

  •  We had a fine diary this morning (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    about somebody's freeware app to reveal funders of political ads on you networks. In regard to this:

    Research & Development, and Action: What we need is a major, coordinated, funded, national project dedicated to researching the ways the 1% manipulates us, and developing strategics for overcoming them.
    This app is one technologically ingenious way to thwart the Citizen's United ruling, which, of course, is a nice--perhaps major--new tool by which the 1% manipulates us.

    Now, I am too lazy to link to the diary, but I will say it was an excellent companion to this one.

    On the theme of your diary, I hope the app catches on. I hope it creates a critical mass of use, and infuses the whole culture.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Mon Aug 27, 2012 at 06:05:30 PM PDT

  •  The Biggest Single Thing They Do On the Other (0+ / 0-)

    side is to agree on being a far right movement.

    On our side we have to build a consensus across the entire American rational political spectrum, from rightwing-light Democrats who support all the Reaganomic policies that concentrate wealth and drive jobs offshore, all the way to the far far looney left who accept that scientists are probably right much of the time.

    So if we leave the rightwing-light and conservative Democrats to their corporate masters and concentrate on our progressives, that's a big cost saver because right now it's only a fraction of the party.

    Probably the second biggest thing they do is relentlessly focus-test messages, themes and policy ideas. If we'll limit our efforts to the progressive fraction of the party including new candidates then we can have some success at that too, even on a far lower budget. We'll have a coherent body of ideas to work with, and a candidate class that has some chance of working with what we come up with.

    Not sure I entirely agree about the end part; I don't see any problem with education, union, trial lawyer, climate change, gender rights or any progressive or leftwing voice helping put out the messages. I do agree that we also need others.

    Remember the biggest motherlode of potential voters are the scores of millions of Americans who could but don't often vote. The many who have the Democrats right this minute behind a major enthusiasm gap compared to Republicans which appeared after Obama's 1st year in office and got us slaughtered in 2010.

    The party is not going to reach out to those voters, they abandoned them 35-40 years ago. Only the progressive, often leftwing voices are going to bother trying to reach them because what they need are services that are very radical compared to today's center.

    So deal the interest groups and radicals in on the messaging too.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Aug 27, 2012 at 06:46:38 PM PDT

    •  Maybe I wrote poorly (0+ / 0-)

      I'm trying to say all of these groups have certain underlying democratic values in common, and by working to reinforce those core values they all help each other, and themselves, instead of just helping themselves in a weak way.

      By reinforcing people's understanding and appreciation of democracy they end up actually helping themselves more than if they were just trying to help themselves.  But they also help each other, and in a more lasting way.

      The right does this by reinforcing a "you should be on your own" message, and that helps them break up unions, beat back environmentalists, take from the poor, etc.  A core message supports all of their pet issues, and when their pet issues do their own messaging, by reinforcing the core message, they help themselves AND the rest of their movement.

      Seeing The Forest -- Who is our economy FOR, anyway? Twitter: @dcjohnson

      by davej on Mon Aug 27, 2012 at 06:58:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  holy subliminal messaging (0+ / 0-)

    in this screen capture of Romney's ad:

  •  Problem is, welfare has never been defended proper (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mali muso

    The reason why we always lose on this issue is because the progressive left tends to shy away from welfare , especially when it comes to race, on the national stage.

    "It's too racially divisive - we should stick to race/class neutral messaging. Never say 'poor people' or 'black people' when pushing progressive ideas regarding welfare or the safety net - always say 'middle class' or 'working class' instead." You know the routine.

    We're too afraid to bring up race in a honest discussion on poverty, because we know we will only end up playing defense and lose in the messaging war against the naturally tribalist instincts of a white, moderately conservative majority population. The right wing knows that all we can do is cower and act outraged when they make these racially charged statements on welfare to appeal to their base. Our outrage is only confirming their biases.

    The primary reason why this strategy works has more to with economic perception than race. The popular belief is that welfare is a total loss for tax payer. This is a falsehood. Since no economic benefit is perceived from a reasonable percentage of the population being on the dole, race comes to the forefront of the debate

    What progressives need to do is redefine this popular perspective on welfare so that we can play offense. We need to ensure that economic benefits of welfare is at the forefront and race takes a backseat.

    The progressive message should be that the poor are the loosest spenders and therefore the welfare money they spend ends up in the pockets of all kinds of businesses that they depend on for survival. The poor are basically 'pollinators of wealth'. The poor don't hoard their welfare money like the rich do - welfare always 'trickles up' into the pockets of the higher societal classes.

    It makes no sense for the convenience or grocery store business owner whose business accepts food stamps to vote Republican because they don't want their taxes going to the poor. Or the renter who rents to people on Section 8 vouchers. These business owners got their tax dollars back  through their business, and more.

    The progressive message on welfare should be about opportunity. The message should be that welfare  helps create or subsidizes businesses and enables them to create or keep jobs. the message should be that it is easier to start a business that siphons welfare dollars from the poor than it is to ask a bank for a loan to start a business. Paying welfare isn't a total loss - the money is there to take and smarter people are finding out ways to earn it back through business opportunities.

    This approach completes the progressive argument for 'trickle-up' economics and inoculates progressives against the charge that 'people on welfare never contribute to society' or that 'a poor man never gave me a job'

    •  How will that work? (0+ / 0-)

      Military personnel also spend money and military bases create jobs.  Building more missles and brewing up nerve gas would create badly-needed engineering jobs.

      Do we want to do that?

      Around here, Minority means an immigrant from Latin America or Polynesia who is not eligible for many tax funded social services.

      •  that's another argument (0+ / 0-)

        if this argument is brought up, we make our usual progressive case for domestic vs foreign, creation vs destruction, life vs death

        FDR's worker programs  vs  GOP neocon war agendas.

        Both create jobs and stimulate the economy but have vastly different consequences.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site