Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jim Holley's avatar

The use of repeated baseless investigations seems like an extension of the Karl Rove tactic of repeating a lie over and over again until it becomes accepted as truth. Rove didn’t invent it, but he certainly made extensive use of it. And it seems to work. Just look at how Republicans kept trickle down economics alive when all evidence has been to the contrary. The curious part is that the conservative base doesn’t just allow the GOP to promote false narratives, they seem to understand it’s their duty to amplify them. So there is a positive feedback loop of strategic lying taking over the conservative playbook. The bigger the lie, the louder it gets and the more it gets repeated. Unless there is a serious penalty for creating lie storms like this, they will only continue to propagate.

Expand full comment
Scott M. Krasner's avatar

Once again I arise to the onset of a severe headache after reading the first paragraph or two of this column. Two points in particular set me off today.

First - Who exactly are the representatives of representative government representing? "Biden’s transition spokesperson ... called their efforts a “stunt.” He isn’t wrong." There is no public groundswell of concern about election fraud and to the best of my knowledge there never was been.

Trump introduced the notion of fraud BEFORE he was elected the first time, screaming about RIGGED elections. Had the media been more demanding of evidence at the time perhaps the "issue" would have been muted. He introduced it again well before the general election this time and again the media abetted the claim by failing to demand that he show his cards. In both cases the Democrats failed to push back forcefully, presumably because they thought he had no chance in 2016, and because they overestimated the degree of voter fatigue with his antics in 2020

So these "representatives" seem to have chosen to die on a hill of their own making, despite the 60+ legal challenges having produced nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. They've manufactured a case, couched in the gravitas of "precedent." It's a doomed effort that benefits no one but their image in Trump's eyes. It only serves as justification for their own future forays into greater voter suppression.

Second - What cat's got the Democrats' tongues? Taking the high road is morally admirable and has yielded exactly nothing. George McGovern vs Richard Nixon? Too liberal. Jimmy Carter as contrapoint to the corrupt Richard Nixon? One and done. Michael Dukakis after 8 years of Reagan? Blown out, wins only 10 states, yet "improves upon" the results of the Democrats in the previous two elections.

The GOP has thrown chaff in the radar of Democrats' messaging for years through the dirty tactics of Lee Atwater, the groundless yet persistent hearings on Benghazi, and flooding the media with the noise of Clinton's emails. Coupled with the media vascillating between "balanced" coverage and the "entertainment value" of Trump, the Democrats have failed, yet again, to adopt tactics to parry the GOP's obstructive strategies. They seem powerless to either borrow from the GOP playbook (and its associated stench) or to just become more adept at developing aggressive approaches to counter the GOP by uncovering its individual and collective failings to serve its constituents and the country as a whole.

I could go on but it's only 5:00 AM and it's been an exhausting day already. As comedian Wanda Sykes said of Black people in America, "we need a better PR person."

Expand full comment
548 more comments...

No posts