On March 10, DK staff published GOP governor is suddenly protective of Medicaid program he tried to kill. The article highlighted Oklahoma Governor Stitt’s apparent reversal and hypocrisy on Medicaid. Comments on the article were far-ranging, but several concerned me, especially as an Oklahoman.
One comment said that we needed to “go masticate fecal matter and depart this world.” (I worded it fancier so you know I’m educated). Some said we were uneducated, others wanted to deny us funds while still others said we are getting what they voted for. I generally agree with all these sentiments (except the first one). I love watching karma come back around and kick voters in the gonads as much as the next person. I love revealing in there tears and sorrow.
However, I started to rethink this and how it affects the Democrat’s messages and ability to attract new voters. (As an aside, right now, neither party is particularly good at attracting and keeping voters. Support for the parties seems to fall along the lines of voting against the other rather than voting for your party, resulting in the ping-pong control of Congress, especially the House.). It reminded me of the old maxim, “All politics is local.” I’m not sure who said it, but it stands true (even more so) today as it did in the past.
In a previous life, I worked with a successful politician. People seeking elected office from both sides of the aisle sought his advice. He would always offer this statement. He understood that people vote for who they know first and then focus on things that impact them right now, not what may come. They can't rely on what may come because they don’t trust the government.
We Oklahomans are a backwards lot. At statehood, our constitution was the most worker-friendly and progressive in the nation. One of our state flags was a red background with a communist/socialist star. Today, we hate unions and deplore anyone who receives assistance, (even though the majority of the state gets it in some form or another). Neither of these change the maxim. Oklahomans, like most every voter, votes on the local issue affecting them, today, not in the future. A good example is renewable energy and jobs.
In rural areas, people rely on jobs from oil and gas companies. These companies pay them just enough to live or get by. Outside of the oil and gas jobs, jobs opportunities are few, including for college-educated workers. When issues around renewable energy arose, particularly raising taxes or anything restricting oil and gas, the companies immediately stop drilling, cease purchasing gas rights, and announce they will leave the state, leading to significant job loss and revenue. It is more than a threat because some companies have done just that.
These companies understand that politics is local or how to frame it as a local issue. The threat of shutdowns or leaving the state will have an immediate personal impact when the people lose jobs, city/county tax bases deplete, etc. The idea that higher taxes allow the state to provide more, better services like mental health, education, roads, and other benefits is too remote and not immediate for most people. First, they don’t see how these programs affect them. They don’t believe they or anyone in their family needs substance abuse training or if they do, they’ll handle it when it comes up. Or, arguing that better roads may reduce wear and tear on vehicle. It doesn’t compute because they already drive a clunker. Second, they fear losing their jobs. Being paid a wage that keeps you at or above the poverty line and medical benefits is always better than having no job. The oil and gas companies know this. So do the Republicans.
On DEI , whether you agree or not, most people supporting the dismantling these programs are not racist (or at least don’t think of themselves as racist, so there is nothing you can do about it). These voters, especially rural voters, view these programs as giving BIPOC, LGBTQ, and other groups a leg up. Now think about how this interpretation from that perspective. Arguing that it’s the wrong interpretation takes too long and doesn’t address the voters’ needs. . They look around and see poverty, joblessness, and sickness but hear how others in the same or similar socio-economic situation get a leg up. That’s messaging.
This is local politics, kitchen-table issues. It is why direct campaigning and grassroots efforts are important. They can explain how things impact individual voters directly. A few years ago, a Democrat won one of our Congressional districts. She did it by meeting almost everyone in the district.
These companies and the Republican party make it easy for voters to understand by couching messages as offering food and protection. Democrats don’t do that. We tend to address things based more on moral ideas, principles, or concepts. For example, Democrats argue that the US needs universal healthcare because it is something everyone should have, a fundamental right. Republicans respond with the message that doing so means businesses will go bankrupt, you’ll lose your job, death panels, etc. They appeal to voters’ self-interest. A logical fallacy. Another example is the last election, a lot of Harris’s campaign focused on safeguarding democracy a principle. The Republicans focused on crime and economy. It’s hard to focus on safeguarding democracy when you don’t have food or a home.
These voters we call uneducated or other names are just looking at what affects them today, , close to home. Unfortunately, They don’t care about helping people in other places or how something is going to affect them in 5, 10, or 20 years. (I blame social media for the increase in toxic individualism). They don’t have the time or ability to do anything else.
The Democrat’s policies are good and for the most part sound. Our messaging sucks. I mean “defund the policy” should not be the name or rally cry for policy (See Death Panels for support). C’mon. This is why Democrats must stop telling everyone or acting like we know what’s best for them, rural voters. Stop looking down on people. Stop being so damned condescending. Even calling us (Oklahomans) uneducated is condescending since it is tied to a lack of a college degree or implies we are somehow dun er than costal elites. By the way, this concept of limiting education or using it synonymously with college, is a huge problem Democrats need to address, quickly.
As I’ve stated elsewhere, I want to win not just now but in the long term, New Deal style. Democrats won’t win outside of the ping-pong elections until they define and communicate a message for people not on either coast. So, for all of you, including myself, that keep calling voters dumb, wishing us to die, or slinging other epithets, I shake my fist at you, hurl a few choice curses, and say, “your arrogance is causing us to lose elections. Please stop. I want to win.”
Just kidding, but you get the point, at least my fellow Okies will. I hope.
