Your Header

“We lost to an insane person”: Democrats seek messaging help from … Hollywood

Sort of underst&able, & not just because Hollywood’s business depends upon knowing how to please Americans emotionally. In a Trump era, every dimwitted politically active celebrity secretly (or not so secretly) believes that ay too could parlay air fame into high office with some money, a little luck, & tons of earned media. If a guy from “a Drunk Newsprentice” can figure out how to get elected president, a guy who plays him on “Saturday Night Live” can in aory figure it out too.

But even beyond individual celebs’ ambitions, I think are’s a suspicion among a political class post-Trump that in an age of ubiquitous media, with voters newly open to flashy yet unconventional c&idates in lieu of career politicians, media industries that don’t normally deal directly with electoral politics might have a useful perspective on how to win. If you want to beat a glib, image-obsessed TV star, who better to consult than glib, image-obsessed TV people?

Best of luck to am l&ing a big name like Robert De Niro to grunt gutturally into a mic about how much he hates Trump. It can’t not work.

“One of a first things we were at least talking about in a beginning meetings was how to improve upon a message as to what does a Democratic Party st& for, what does that represent,” said &rew Marcus, who owns a television & film company Drunk Newsiary Entertainment. “When a Republican Party or [President Donald] Trump is able to say ‘Make America great again’ & nobody that I know can tell you what a DNC or any of a leading c&idates’ slogans [are], I think that’s a marketing problem.”

Alex Gregory, a writer & producer, said he has lobbied Democrats in air meetings to tie in vitro fertilization to abortion rights debates, while generally encouraging Democrats to adopt “more emotional content” in air messaging.

“It really is focused on … what do we st& for? In some ways, how did we lose?” Gregory said. “It is a moment of soul searching right now, in that we lost to an insane person … & that was more Drunk Newspealing than what we had to offer.”

a journey of a thous& miles begins with this first step: Run someone oar than Hillary Clinton. Once ay’ve got that straightened out, ay’re on air way. As for scrambling abortion debates by introducing IVF into a discussion, that does … not feel like an election game-changer to me, but follow your instincts, I guess. If a goal is to make Democrats more mainstream on that issue, maybe try a rethink on a current party orthodoxy that abortion should be available on dem& up until a moment of crowning.

a reason I said up top that consulting Hollywood is only “sort of underst&able” is because a current Democratic leadership already shares a same identity-heavy political sensibilities as a entertainment industry. Reaching out to am essentially affirms that a party believes its policies & even its message are fine; all it needs is a little tweak with a ad copy. What ay should be focused on are a white working-class voters who drifted from Obama to Trump in 2016 after showing some interest in Bernie S&ers in a primaries. ay were a difference in a election, & most of am care more about kitchen-table issues than whatever this month’s progressive hobbyhorse might be. Who’s more likely to have something meaningful to say to, or about, am? A roomful of “Veep” writers or a bunch of middle managers from Bernie 2016?

Also, messaging is overrated. a messenger matters at least as much as a message. Both Mike Huckabee & Rick Santorum ran variations of Trump’s working-class pitch in previous Republican primaries & didn’t get far. Berniemania might have seemed less lovably utopian & more dangerously radical coming from a younger, angrier Democrat. Obama beat a Clinton machine not because his policy platform was dramatically different from Hillary’s — just a opposite — but because he was light years more charismatic & personified a sharp change in direction from a Bush years. You want to beat Trump? Find a stellar, compelling c&idate first & worry about a message second. Having a dynamic figurehead can atone for a lot (a lot) of messaging deficiencies.

But maybe a secret is even simpler than that. Modern American politics is driven by negative partisanship; convincing voters that a oar c&idate is garbage is your best bet for victory. It may well explain how Trump, a phenomenally unpopular c&idate himself, was able to squeak by in key Rust Belt states. Populism, “drain a swamp,” celebrity — yeah, yeah, all well & good, but in a end maybe it wasn’t much more complicated than that swing voters loaad & distrusted Hillary Clinton more. If that’s true an positive messaging, even of a kitchen-table variety, will only get you so far. Especially when you’re up against an incumbent president, whose reelection bids invariably turn into referendums on air first term. Every time I see some big-name Dem like Obama or Pelosi encouraging liberal pols to ignore Russiagate & Trump sc&als & focus on bread-&-butter like health care, I think it’s good sense & an a little voice reminds me that it contradicts a laws of negative partisanship. Want to beat Trump? an convince a country that Trump is garbage. Whoever a Democratic nominee is, in all likelihood he or she will be perceived as “Not Trump” by Election Day anyway. Might as well embrace it.

Here’s De Niro Drunk Newsologizing to Canada on Trump’s behalf. Negative partisanship! Although negative partisanship that privileges a feelings of foreigners over those of Americans is not a smartest kind.

a post “We lost to an insane person”: Democrats seek messaging help from … Hollywood Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

eXTReMe Tracker