Why MSNBC's ratings are down

Everybody has a theory. Certainly Steve M. points to some valid reasons for MSNBC's ratings drop. It's true compelling current events will trump opinion programming. Perhaps some of their core audience is disillusioned because of the scandals, but I don't think that applies as strongly. And as far as the summer lag in readership for left wing political blogs, as long as I've blogging these ten years, that happens every summer. I think that's more because every damn summer brings some blitz of GOP generated faux outrage that draws their base and the lack of real news leaves liberals with more free time to do real world stuff like create Vines and take Instagrams of their cute pets. Also liberals tend to travel more than conservative poli-junkies. Liberals post travel pix. Meanwhile the cons are caught up in pushing the lastest haterage. It never ends for them.

The other thing I'm seeing in terms of the current drop in ratings is based solely on what I see on social nets. I don't watch any of the talk shows anymore, but I do *watch* Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow on the twitter every night. I'm seeing mostly viewer dissatisfaction with Hayes new format. What they loved about Uppers was the comprehensive coverage of undercovered stories and the mix of mostly liberal guests. What I'm seeing now is a lot complaints about too many conservatives on his show and a notable lack of pushback by Chris. In fact, I've seen more than one accusation about Hayes "going emo" and gettin all anti-Obama. That's not what they're tuning in for. They want to see right wing memes get shot down, not validated by yet more exposure.

To some extent that's Rachel's current problem too. Lately I've been seeing a lot of -- oh, you're giving air time to that right wing idiot ... click. This was especially true about her show that joined in on the Obama bashing over the leak investigations. The complaints about that one survived well past the actual airing of the program. However you want to define Chris and Rachel's viewer base, within my circle of view anything that smacks of both sides do it turns them off. We're inundated with that sort of journalism already. They want a refuge where the liberal view is fully aired and undiluted by too much conservative view balance.

Far as I can see, Rachel is already turning that around. Last night's program was being cheered again. As for Chris, not seeing any love for his new format. Apparently it's just not the same kind of show anymore. They should probably work on that.

Wherein I praise Lady Gaga for the first time

I appreciate her worth ethic and her originality but I've never cared much for her music. Nonetheless, I'm impressed Lady Gaga turned down $1 million to perform for the RNC. And they pitched hard to get her:

Jennings, whose company is being sued by AAN, was instructed by Meachum to try to make the offer to Lady Gaga more tempting by telling her it would be an event "honoring women who run for public office."

"Also, tell them that $150,000 will go towards a domestic violence shelter," Meachum further instructed Jennings in an effort to make the offer harder for Lady Gaga to refuse.

Granted she doesn't need the money or the exposure. And somewhat insulting that they thought they could trick her with fake feminism. I imagine her telling her handlers, "Fuck those assholes. Tell them no." So not that hard a choice for her but still a good one. It can only help the liberal cause when high profile celebs like Lady Gaga reject the crackpot con agenda.

Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren 2016

I want to shoot myself for mentioning 2016 but I was only half joking when I tweeted that last night. I mean how fun would it be, after years of the fake "Obama is a socialist" spin, to have a real Socialist run? And what's not to love about the way Bernie Sanders talks?

“In a time of disfunctionality in the Senate, and all kinds of absurdity, this probably takes the cake when you filibuster your own” bill, the self-described "democratic socialist" lawmaker told MSNBC's Ed Schultz Friday evening. “The American people want action and it is undemocratic, it is unAmerican when a small minority can deny the majority from going forward.” [...]

“On the other hand, the majority in this country has the right to rule, has the right to make decisions. Obama won a huge victory. We won 25 out of 33 elections in the Senate. We won seats in the House.”

Yes I know he is never going to President, but he is a helluva spokesman for the liberal point of view. I've long thought he never gets the attention, or the affection, he deserves.

RIP George McGovern

Sorry to see George McGovern died. He was a good man. He was the first national candidate I actively worked to elect. I was crushed when he was defeated. But his indominable spirit inspired me to keep working for change, no matter what the odds of success. And over the years I've seen some wins.

Sadly, all these years later, I find myself fighting those same battles all over again. But George never quit trying and neither will I.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

You can't win if you don't play the game

Adding a bit to my previous post on tragically disappointed emo-progressives, the lovely Marcellina, (if you're not reading her Austrian based blog, you're a loser), kindly provides a link to this Rebecca Solnit piece on pragmatism versus wishful thinking of the emo-left.

Read it all because she's so eloquent but here's a couple of the salient points. On the accusations of the purists that pragmatic libs are ignoring, if not condoning, the unattractive policies of the Obama administration:

There are bad things and they are bad. There are good things and they are good, even though the bad things are bad. ...mentioning [the good things] does not negate the reality of the bad things.

And on why we vote for compromised Democrats instead of throwing away our ballots on protest votes:

But having marriage rights or discrimination protection or access to health care is not the lesser of two evils. If I vote for a Democrat, I do so in the hopes that fewer people will suffer, not in the belief that that option will eliminate suffering or bring us to anywhere near my goals or represent my values perfectly.

All politicians are flawed. All politicians are bought off to some extent. It's in the job description. Nonetheless, as a whole, Democrats are still the most responsive to the concerns of the left and advance our goals, albeit at a glacial pace. Republicans will not only ignore us, they will do everything in their power to thwart liberal goals and destroy any advances we've ever made in the entire course of our history.

This is not rocket science. There's plenty of time between elections to agitate for change. If you haven't built a viable third choice by the last few weeks before the casting of ballots, then the winning tactic is to install the politicans you have the best chance of persuading to your side. You won't get there by tearing those candidates down. Or by wasting time attacking your natural allies for their lack of purity.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Because bitching on the internets changes everything

Shorter this guy: Pragmatic liberals are being mean to me because I have unrealistic expectations so I going to whine about their lack of purity and call them names. No idea who he is, but he called Doug J a Manichean monster.

I'm so tired of self-proclaimed hippies claiming to be punched because they didn't get the damn pony they expected, much less the unicorn they dreamed of and practical liberals point out that's not a realistic goal. Probably shouldn't have bothered but I left the woebegone "lifelong" pacifist this in his comments:

I see this long post that tells me what perfect outcomes you want, but I don't see is what ARE you doing to get there besides bitching on the internet? And please don't tell me you're punishing the lesser evil side by withholding your vote, because all that does in reality is give the more evil party the implicit consent to do whatever they want.

You want a third party alternative, then you have to commit to working every single day for years to build one that presents a viable challenge. And you need to accept that you sometimes have to make tradeoffs. Take small progress over grand changes. And even that you might not live long enough to see the results of your work.

But that's too much effort. Much easier to proclaim principled dissent as an excuse for laziness. Meanwhile, we're watching decades worth of actual progressive policies being systemically destroyed because no Democratic hero stepped up to deliver their demands instantly and single-handedly. These "principled hippies" think it's okay to let that happen because, that'll show the man he's not the boss of them.

They don't seem to realize people fought hard for the rights they benefit from today. They fought for years, over multiple adminstrations. Hell, many gave their lives to win the incremental changes that led to larger and better outcomes over time. It's not that I don't have any empathy for guys like this whiner. I do. But if they want things to change they need to focus on the small victories and build on them instead of overdosing on the emo in a transparent bid for validation for their world view.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

One of us

The news has been so depressing for so long, it feels especially great to find a feel good story. This one gives me some hope for the future of mankind. Once conservative whiz kid turns liberal.

If you don't remember the 13 year old who became the darling of the cons after he gave a blistering speech at CPAC in 2/09, Wonkette has the video. The kid, Jonathan Krohn, is 17 now and he has seen the light. He renounced all his former views because he grew up and starting thinking for himself.

“I think it was naive,” Krohn now says of the speech. “It’s a 13-year-old kid saying stuff that he had heard for a long time.… I live in Georgia. We’re inundated with conservative talk in Georgia.… The speech was something that a 13-year-old does. You haven’t formed all your opinions. You’re really defeating yourself if you think you have all of your ideas in your head when you were 12 or 13. It’s impossible. You haven’t done enough.”

Sadly, most of the role models of his childhood apparently never made the same transition into the critical thinking of mature adults.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Something is better than nothing

Building on bit on my previous post, I'm fascinated by the response to Bill Scher's op-ed. Trying to figure out the difference between the GOP's adamant refusal to compromise one inch on anything and the same mindset on our side. When GOPers do it we call it evil and stupid. How does it magically become wise and noble if we do it?

Just don't understand the logic behind all this mockery about corporate apologists. The corporations own everything. They're bigger than us. Stronger. Better armed and infinitely better financed. To try to destroy them by force would be like a general sending in one unit armed with bows and arrows against an entire army riding in tanks.

Refusing to negotiate for the liberal agenda is like expecting to get a raise at work by ignoring your boss and bitching non-stop to your co-workers instead. And I don't see how you gain anything by refusing to accept partial victories.

Let's say you love your job. But you think you're undervalued. So you do go to your boss and tell him you want 10K raise and an extra three weeks of vacation. Boss says sorry, for whatever reason, good or bad, he just can't do that. He offers you 3K and two weeks vacation. Or 5K and one week vacation. Whatever. He just can't or won't give you everything you want.

So what do you do? Quit in a rage, leaving the room screaming that he's failed you completely because he didn't give you everything you wanted, right away? Even though you know your only other option for employment is at a place you hate at a lower salary? Not seeing the tactical advantage in that strategy.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Won't win if you don't fight

John Cole has some timely advice for liberals about what to do post SCOTUS decision on Obamacare:

For once in your god damned lives, put aside your fucking stupid beliefs about purity and how the public option was the bestest thing since sliced bread, accept the massive, game-changing victory you got today, and use it as a god damned bludgeon against the troglodytes whose health care plans are modeled after Ebeneezer Scrooge. For once, focus your bloodlust on Republicans instead of the DLC/Firebaggers/ANYONE WITHOUT AN (R) AFTER THEIR NAME. I’m begging you.

As the saying goes, read the whole damn thing for yourself. Mr. Cole is at his very best at +6 or more.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Gut check for progressives

Facebook find of the day. Something to think about from Van Jones.



Lost the link to the original, but click the graphic to embiggen.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Blue Dogs put down

I've long maintained that Blue Dogs were a detriment to progressive progress within the Democratic party. I endured years of no little criticism for suggesting that even though they often voted with the party on the small stuff, too often on the high profile issues they defected and gave Republicans bi-partisan cover. It made it nearly impossible to make GOPers own their policy and draw the bright line between the parties that had been too long lost.

So I was thrilled to see two more Blue Dogs go down in the Pennsylvania primary yesterday. I'm hearing the guy who beat Altmire isn't all that much better, but any small improvement is better than none in that district. Altmire joined Bart Stupak's stupid pack of fools in the health care fight. It's heartening to see him lose when he was he was projected to win, especially because his loss was greatly assisted by organized labor flexing some serious muscle.

The guy who beat Holden was the better victory. Don't know much about him, but he's a progressive and apparently willing to stand up for environmental realism since the League of Conservation Voters invested heavily in that race.

Unlike 2010, where the Blue Dogs lost because of Tea Party fanaticism, these defeats were clearly caused by progressive organization. I've been saying for years that liberals and progressives needed to stop obsessing over the Oval office and focus more on the Congressional races. Not that I think I had anything to do with it, but good to see it finally happening. This is how we will eventually change the world.



[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Check that mic check

After yet another huge round of huzzahs on the twitter machine, I checked out one of these mic checks the Occupy people have been doing at Republican town halls. I didn't feel like cheering. Frankly, I cringed. Sure it was done with positive intention, and vaguely more respectful, but it reminded me of nothing so much as the Tea Party mobs that disrupted Democratic town halls in the summer of health care reform.

I've been trying to articulate my thoughts on this without sounding like a scoldy schoolmarm, but since he's already done it better, I'm outsourcing my discomfort to Charles P. Pierce:

Which is only part of the reason why I'd recommend that the Occupy people stay away from activities like Thursday's action at Michele Bachmann's speech in South Carolina. In the most pragmatic sense, things like that are useless. They give Bachmann a chance to wax nobly on behalf of everyone's right to free speech, while changing no minds in the hall because there are no minds to change. (Least of all Bachmann's, which you couldn't change with mind-expanding drugs and the cast of The Manchurian Candidate brought out of retirement.) Heckling Michele Bachmann is a pointless waste of breath.

Moreover, the optics are terrible. Part of the reason the Tea Party Movement is as generally unpopular as it has become is that people got sick of seeing every town-hall meeting turned into a geriatric production of West Side Story. And before anyone makes the argument about the 2010 midterms, let's remember that the Tea Party had large-scale corporate logistical power behind it, as well as the unblinking support of one entire television "news" channel, both of which were enough to intimidate "serious" journalists into giving the Tea Party the benefit of vastly unearned doubts. The Occupy movement has none of that. In fact, all that power and influence is pretty much arrayed against it at this point. That makes all the difference. Continuing to interrupt the banal little ceremonies of the 2012 election process is futile and cannot end well.

As Charles points out, the silent witness speaks so much louder than a cacophony of slogans shouted in a crowded room. The tents make a powerful statement without saying a word. Let them speak to the greater issues that threaten to tear civil society to shreds and leave the instant politics of the moment out of it.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Suck. On. This.

Always loved him, but Sam Seder's great moment in television just put him on my hero for life list. I only regret he didn't enunciate the phrase a little more strongly, and slowly, when he threw it in little Tommy Friedman's face. Still. Total win. Can't easily embed those videos so, click the link to see it live.

Meanwhile, if you need some context on the origins of suck on this, well click that link.

Better narratives, please

Yes, I'm as pissed off as the next tree hugger about President Obama backing off on the EPA's proposed stricter standard for ground smog. But to keep it in perspective, we're no worse off than we have been since 2008 when Bush eased the standard. And it's not like Obama is abandoning the whole enviromental agenda. He did push through the better mileage standards not that long ago and according to his statement there's plenty of other rules the GOPers are trying to abolish, along with the EPA itself, that he claims he's going to fight for, so it's not like there aren't going to be other, an bigger battles in the future.

As a rule, I don't get worked up into a lather over such ongoing political manuvering, particularly in the silly season. But what pisses me off much more than the walk back is the framing Obama used to justify it.

In a statement, the president reiterated his commitment to environmental concerns, but added: “At the same time, I have continued to underscore the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover. With that in mind, and after careful consideration, I have requested that Administrator Jackson withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time.”

This particular issue is one the GOP was gearing up to use heavily in the 2012 campaign, so I understand why the White House would want to neutralize it. But this statement is pure GOP framing. It's the sort of false talking point I spend hours every day pushing back against. As I tweeted to Obama today, why am I spending my time debunking this language if he's going to turn around and reinforce it with repetition? I find it hard to believe, with all the resources the White House has, they couldn't come up with a better narrative. To simply repeat Republican tropes is not helping.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Choose your battles wisely

Don't often visit the Great Orange Satan, but this is certainly worth a read in full. Chris Bowers explains why poutrage is useless and gets quote of the day with this line.

Progressives staying home poses no threat to those who oppose progressives.

Don't agree with every single thing he said here but the overall point that bitching on the internets isn't going to advance progressive goals is a good one.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

No, Vitter should not resign

I understand the irritation with the double standard and the hypocrisy, but Steve Weinstein is right. This outcry on the left for the resignations of GOPers who have been in sex scandals is not helping. As Steve says:

But there is a reason some wise person named Mahatma once said: An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Blind serves the GOP as they goose step about demolishing Planned Parenthood and unions, plundering jobs and any hopes for the survivability of an American middle class. The more they can saturate the airwaves with noise about penises and diapers, the easier it is for them to murder everything liberals hold dear.

And beyond the distraction factor, the remaining question is, are liberals really willing to act as proxy theocrats? Are they really willing to condemn non-harmful sexual conduct between consenting adults because it's a political opponent commiting the act? Not seeing how that's so different from what Bretibart and the fundies are doing.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

First government shutdown averted - now what?

I was already asleep when it happened but it played out pretty much the way I thought it would. Our political overlords reached a compromise, if by compromise you mean the GOPers get more than they asked for at the start and in return agreed to let the EPA function and not destroy Planned Parenthood -- this time.

This is of course, is just the first skirmish, (or squirmish if your native tongue is Palinese), and the big battles are not far in the future. Haven't seen a list of the "historic" and "painful" cuts yet, but I'm sure they won't be making the Democrats' former progressive base happy. I cruised the internets this morning. Lot of pissed off people out there swearing they'll sit out 2012 too to teach the Democrats a lesson they apparently didn't learn in 2010.

I'm as pissed off and disgusted as anybody. Maybe even more. It's clear the Dems aren't listening to us and once again allowed the GOPers to set the narrative. But I look out there and see a GOP that is out of control and not even pretending that their agenda isn't to utterly destroy the middle class and restore feudalism. Agree we need to send Dems a message. My problem is I think we're doing it wrong. Too much focus on the executive and not enough on the Congressional side. So we get stuck with a weak, triangulating President for another four years. If we could elect more strong progressives in House and Senate, THEY could "make him do it," in a way that we obviously can't.

Thinking that's where the Tea Party has outplayed us in 2010. I know they had a lot of help from the plutocrats who exploited Citizen United. But still, progs sat it out. Tea Party organized and elected maniacs who are now pulling the strings and suceeding in moving the narrative even more to the far right. Wondering if we could take a lesson from that strategy.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]

Wisconsin GOPers run from the law

Now that the huge mass demonstrations are over, the teevee news is pretty much ignoring the state but big doings afoot in Cheesehead Central. Wisconsin Republicans are in legal trouble over their hasty machinations in pushing through the union busting bill. Do read the whole article at the link to see the breadth of their problems but this one graf is a good summation:

The Wisconsin Republicans’ strategies from the beginning of this debacle have been so foolish as to make one question their ability to lead in any capacity. Legislators should be able to strategize and plan, but these folks have fumbled the ball at every pass and it looks like their own hubris will block them from a first down, let alone a touchdown. In fact, it almost appears as if they scored one for the other team because the court is just beginning to hear testimony about the open meetings law violation, and this alone is enough to make serious problems for the Republicans. There is a mountain of evidence to back up the claim that they violated the open meeting laws, including their own press conferences, videos, testimony of police officers working the Capitol that night, and a petition signed by just under 3,000 witnesses.

This makes the upcoming election of the state Supreme Court justice even more important than usual.

In related news, Wisconsin Democrats have enough signatures to force the first recall election. This "less than halfway through the 60-day window for gathering the signatures." The local paper also reports, "It is expected to be the first completed of 19 active recall efforts registered between Feb. 24 and March 2 against 16 senators."

They only need three wins to realign the Senate. Even if they only get one or two, it would be a big win for the workers. If they won all 19, well, future historians will probably look back and call it the beginning of the workers revolution.

Progressives United

The deluded voters of Wisconsin put the GOP in power and kicked out the best advocate for workers rights in DC last November. But former Senator Russ Feingold isn't about to quietly retire into oblivion. Today Feingold announced the formation of Progressives United, a new PAC to act an a counterweight to the Kochtopus released unto the unsuspecting masses via the Citizens United decision at SCOTUS. The group will "boost progressive candidates and combat corporate influence in politics."

“Washington, sadly, has become a playground for corporations and our lobbyists,” Mr. Feingold said. “It’s time we stood up to the total dominance of corporate power that’s invaded our democracy and hijacked our elections.”

Feingold went on to say in the video announcement:

"We'll work to ensure that our elected officials, both Republicans and Democratic, are held accountable to the people, and not to the lobbyists in Washington. We'll call out the media, when they hide from the real story. And we'll support candidates when they uphold our progressive ideals, even if the Beltway establishment doesn't."

Sounds good to me. Pretty sure the deluge of misinfo unleashed on the airwaves by the conservatives in 2010 is going to look like a trickle compared to 2012. We're going to need all the pushback we can get.

Obligatory Olbermann post

I confess I am not a Keith Olbermann fan. While I admired his work for the most part, especially during the Bush years, I've always found his style abrasive. I found his delivery as arrogant and smug as Chuck Todd. Pure nails on the blackboard. Even when I still had cable I didn't watch the show, but I did make it a point to read the transcripts of his Special Commentary segments and often linked to them.

I'm not that shocked to see he's been dumped. And contrary to some of the speculation I've seen that this was a mutual decision, I don't think that's true. It's telling that he was suspended on that bogus political contribution thing just after Comcast and NBC struck a deal to merge and now the day after the merger went through, he's suddenly out. Also, if you read the transcript of Olbermann's abrupt farewell, this line stands out:

I think the same fantasy popped into the head of everybody in my business who has ever been told what I have been told -- "this will be the last edition of your show."

Maybe he did choose to quit because the management told he had to tone it down or something, but this still looks and feels like a direct result of the merger to me.

But for whatever reason, he's gone. I won't necessarily miss his voice, in the literal sense, but I will very much miss his words and his insights. Even when I disagreed with him, he was a thoughtful analyst and a courageous commentator. So yeah, he will be missed.

[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]