From time to time, we all read something where suddenly words jump out from the page, grabbing our attention. This happened to me the other day while reading a memo from Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg and strategist James Carville, along with two of their colleagues who work for the Democracy Corps, Erica Seifert and Fredrica Mayer.
This piece was based on a bipartisan poll conducted last month by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for National Public Radio with the Democracy Corps, Resurgent Republic, and Women’s Voices Women Vote Action Fund. Democracy Corps is a 15-year-old organization, started by Greenberg and Carville, and it has effectively become the survey research and message development arm of the House Democratic leaders, providing high-quality research in the form of national polls, surveys of competitive congressional districts, and focus groups among key groups. For tax reasons, all results have to be publicly released, thus giving outsiders a look over the shoulder at some of the highest quality research out there. Resurgent Republic is a new GOP version of the Democracy Corps, started by Republican pollster Whit Ayres.
One of the most useful things that the Democracy Corps does in its polling, like other high-quality pollsters for both sides, is to test various messages for each party, ascertaining which ones are more salient than others. Sometimes messages may sound good, particularly to folks inside the Beltway, but when actually tested with real voters, the response isn’t always as anticipated.
The key phrase in the Greenberg/Carville memo was, “As a start, Democrats should bury any mention of ‘the recovery.’ ” The full paragraph went like this:
Democrats have to be hard-hitting and focused on the economy. As a start, Democrats should bury any mention of “the recovery.” That message was tested in the bipartisan poll we conducted for NPR, and it lost to the Republican message championed by Karl Rove. The Democratic message missed how much trouble people are in, and doesn’t convince them that policymakers really understand or are even focusing on the problems they continue to face. That framework gets in the way of a direct economic message.
More at National Journal
No recovery summer this year, eh?
The Collective has issued its directive. Better comply, drones.
Oh, this is golden. I have had many arguments over the abject failure of this administration to recover the economy, all met with the identical response of “the economy is recovering nicely. X% growth predicted this quarter. Blah, blah, blah.”
Finally, something that shows that harping on that “recovery” mantra is beginning to insult the intelligence of even the moderately intelligent. Apparently, the reality all around them doesn’t do the trick.
Typical of the left….don’t allow the truth to interfere with the march to the socialist dystopia.
I can’t wait to see libs explain how medical costs have skyrocketed in this first quarter of obamacare by 9.9% especially when the majority of the disaster has been postponed until after the next election.
Democratic candidates should repeatedly ask specifically what republicans intend to do, if they regain control of the Senate.
For example, since regaining control of the House republicans have taken 54 separate votes on measures that would have either totally repeal or seriously damaged Obamacare. Obviously republicans have every intention of getting rid of it, if they’re ever in a position to do so. So, exactly what do they intend to replace it with?
Continue on down the list, demanding detailed answers on every issue. The people have a right to know specifically what they’re voting for.
@Greg:
I’d tell them to promise amnesty and tax increases.
And that you can keep your doctor.
Regarding recovery, it might be worth mention that it wasn’t democrats whose long-term program of irresponsible tax cuts and banking and financial system deregulation set the stage for the 2007-2008 economic crash to begin with. Basically, they’re pitching the same agenda now that nearly wrecked the national economy to begin with.
Why?
Because the people they actually represent got much richer because of it.
@Greg:
How many times do you need to be presented with this information? What is the nature of this problem?
I mean, what good would it do for Democratic candidates to repeatedly ask specifically what Republicans intend to do, if Democrats are unable to process the responses that they’re repeatedly given?
@Greg:
This of course is incorrect.
Remember, thanks to the courtesy of C-SPAN and the magic of YouTube, we can actually watch the Democrats cause the financial collapse as they do it here and here. In fact, this video evidence proves the exact opposite of your claim, that in fact it was the Democrats that blocked common sense regulation and caused the financial collapse after they gained control of Congress in 2006.
You’ve been presented with this information multiple times as well. Could you try to describe the issues you’re having with being able to process information that is presented to you multiple times? Is this the notorious ineducable nature of drones that we’re dealing with here or are you simply attempting to lie again?
Unsurprisingly, it turns out that what we had before ObamaCare, though imperfect, was superior to ObamaCare itself. So simply repealing ObamaCare, and doing nothing to replace it, would be a better alternative to what we have now.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/30/mission-accomplished-u-s-health-care-spending-soars-nearly-10-percent-in-first-quarter-most-since-1980/
This should surprise no one considering that the bill was passed based purely on an emotional desire for substandard Universal Healthcare, rather than on a rational decision based on actually reading the bill, which none of them did.
The White House’s Obamacare victory lap looking more like a false start
@Kraken, #7:
The problem is that those “alternatives” remain every bit as bogus as they were the first time you posted that link.
@Greg:
Well, I’m actually impressed here because this is the first time that I’ve actually read you acknowledge them in any way. I mean that sincerely.
Now, bogus in what way, specifically? Do you mean to say that they don’t exist?
@Kraken, #8″
Characterizing out-of-context video snippets assembled on a string of propaganda subtext as some sort of conclusive proof is evidence of little more than gullibility.
What happened to Rep. Richard Baker’s call for more oversight and regulation? He was holding hearings and sounding the alarm and calling for regulatory reform in 2000, correct? So, in January 2001 republican George W. Bush became president, republicans controlled the House, and republicans had parity in the Senate with Cheney as a tie-breaker. As of January 2003 republicans had regained majority control of both the House and the Senate, and still had GWB in the White House.
The truth of the matter is that republicans have generally resisted efforts to impose additional regulation and oversight on anything the financial sector has been able to exploit to increase profits at the taxpayers’ risk and/or expense. That would include the private subprime mortgage industry—the level at which potential borrowers’ qualifications and risk levels were actually determined. Fannie Mae didn’t determine whether individual borrowers were qualified. They accepted what was determined by the private sector.
@Kraken, #11:
I believe we’ve had this same go-around two or three times previously. If you’re curious what was said, please hunt up the earlier occasions when you have asked that question. I haven’t got the time or inclination to keep repeating it.
@Greg:
‘Scuse me, Greg, but I think you’ve got some things confused. Not even Ezra Klein believes the tax cuts had anything to do with the recession. Additionally, in the midst of two wars Bush has the deficit down to $160 billion in 2007.
About that financial disaster…..
Who signed the repeal of Glass Steagall on the advice of Robert Rubin?
Who refused to regulate derivatives?
Who pushed Fannie to 51% subprimes?
Who made predatory lending legal?
Hmmmm?
@Greg:
Ah yes. The Collective’s classic “heavily edited” response when caught red handed on video. You do realize of course, that your response is as equally stupid as it reads, right? It’s like the teenager who gets caught with a quarter barrel in his closet and tells his parents that he has no idea where it came from. You know that we can see right through you, right?
Editing video is no longer the arcane practice that it was 20 years ago. People widely know how video is edited these days, what practices and techniques are involved such as the Kuleshov effect, the 180 degree rule, and eyeline matching, jump cuts, etc., and can recognize these things instantly. I mean, these things aren’t really secrets anymore. You do know this, right? The unedited version of these videos are undoubtedly available for anyone who wishes to edit a rebuttal anyway. Regardless, there’s nothing as propagandist about these videos as say, Rachel Maddow deliberately lying about the Koch brothers and refusing to retract for instance.
It’s worth noting here though, that adults know when you respond with nothing more than bluster words like “bogus” and “gullibility” accompanied with a lack of specific substantive details in your rebuttals that you have no idea what you’re talking about and/or refuse to acknowledge reality. That’s not your fault personally. It’s just the inherent nature of what it means to be a part of today’s academia.
@Greg:
LOL! Wow, what a blatant cop-out! LOL!
Keeping repeating things is the only thing you have an inclination to do. Hell, it’s all you do.
As far as I can recall, our previous sessions end with me posting that link and you not even acknowledging the information contained therein. So no, as far as I know you haven’t given a specific response as to why these plans are bogus. Let’s be perfectly honest here though, you haven’t even read the plan you do support much less the list of Republican alternative plans, so you really have no idea what you’re talking about on any level. Hell, the people you sent to Washing didn’t even read the bill they passed. Why would you?
@Greg:
It’s just so bizarre that you could continue to type out sentences like these even after watching the Democrats do the very thing that you’re falsely accusing Republicans of here in this video. Are you sure you’re not a troll?
More hilarity ensues:
House committee claims only two-thirds of federal ObamaCare enrollees paid first premium by April 15
@Greg: Why do you suppose the Republicans are trying to vote Obamacare away? Racism? Well, of course you do. However, the REAL reason is the reason you see all around you… it is devastating not only health care but the entire economy.
How about we replace Obamacare with an economy in which people can (as before) afford their own choices in health care.
@Greg: The tax cuts generated an additional $750 billion dollars. From 2004 to 2008, Bush was reducing deficits. The economy was doing its job, creating revenue and reducing the debt.
Then came the Community Reinvestment Act’s piper to be paid. Carter created it, Clinton mandated mortgages be issued for it (and deregulated the finance industry) and Bawny Fwank fought regulation of Fannie Mae. While the excessive spending of both parties made the effects of the recession worse, liberal policies brought it about and Obama’s policies keeps the recession alive and kicking (.1% growth. hoo. ray.)
We need to purge government of liberals. THEY are the problem.
@Bill Burris:
It’s entirely possible that Greg posted a detailed specific response the the list of alternative Republican plans, and I just missed it. Frankly however, I suspect that he’s simply lying.
In any case, I suspect that the real reason he won’t engage in specific analysis of the plans, is because he wants to foment a kind of “the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know” argument, hence his perpetuation of the “Republicans have no plan” lie. Additionally, I believe that he perceives any plan that doesn’t directly lead to an oppressive single payer system to be “bogus.”
@Kraken, #8:
In that sentence you’ve linked to an article by Daniel Klein titled Are You Smarter than a Sixth Grader, concerning a study conducted by the conservative author. It’s an interesting question. If you are, you might recognize the faulty nature of the study questions themselves. The New Republic had this to say about it:
I like a concise summation like that, when it’s preceded by a number of specific observations that back up the conclusion.
@Greg:
That’s a fairly eloquent distraction. I applaud you good sir.
Just out of curiosity, how long did it take for the Collective to give you a response to your inquiry?
Incidentally, it turns out that “liberal hawk” Jonathan Chait also wrote that, “Libertarian Hero Cliven Bundy Shockingly Turns Out to Be Gigantic Racist.”
Did he retract his errors?
@Greg:
Well, let’s go ahead and examine those observations. The bulk of Chait’s article seems to argue that the reason that liberals didn’t do well on questions of basic economics, is because they subscribe to Keynesian economics. Unsurprisingly, “The 1960s and 1970s were the golden age of Keynesianism.” So in essence the study holds true because a lack of basic economic knowledge is the very thing leads some to embrace Keynesianism.
Additionally, Chait links to a study by Alan B. Kruger to support his argument with regards to minimum wages effects on unemployment. Since Princeton is no longer hosting the study for whatever reason, I had to use the Wayback Machine to access it. What’s interesting here is that the December 2000 study focuses on New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and contends that there is seemingly no correlation between minimum wage and unemployment.
However a more recent study in March of 2014, takes a look at a greater swatch of American states, and the Daily Caller sums up their findings best:
The conclusion from this is that the pulled and highly restricted Princeton study from 14 years ago, may not present the most accurate picture.
So there’s really nothing in Chait’s reactionary article that refutes Klein’s study, even though you may find the wording pleasing to read.
See; I can do it. Why can’t you?
@Kraken, #24:
How Minimum Wage Increased Unemployment and Reduced Job Creation in 2013
The title itself is nothing more than an assumption.
You see what they’ve done, don’t you? They’ve diverted attention from the significant fact that they’ve left out unemployment data on all 31 states which have a minimum wage equal to the federal rate of $7.25 per hour. If their assumption is correct, those states should have collectively had the lowest 2013 unemployment rates of all. Now why would they leave out all the states that should most clearly demonstrate their point?
Well, let’s take one and try to figure that out. How about Texas, the state republicans like to claim has a booming economy because of a business-friendly republican regulatory environment. They’ve held the minimum wage at $7.25.
So, the 2013 teen unemployment rate *drum roll* was…
Well, it was 21.5%. Is that better than most of the 19 states with higher minimum wage levels?
I really don’t know. Because the chart in the study has also failed to provide the full rates for the 19 states in question. Only the amount by which the rate increased over a year is provided. That seems like another curious omission.
I think I don’t like this study. There are too many things left out. Why are we supposed to believe it’s really demonstrating anything at all, let alone the assumption stated in the title? Are we expected to round up all of the necessary data and complete the study properly ourselves to decide?
Most likely not. We’re just suppose to read the title, and skim through all of the b.s., and then conclude that something has been demonstrated.
@Greg:
And the answer would be, ‘not what the Dimocrats are doing’.
Greg
there won’t be any RECOVERY from DEMOCRATS,
no matter what they do, OBAMACARE is too low to ever RECOVER.
it cross the line of recovery,
IT WAS NEVER GIVEN TO REPUBLICANS FOR STUDY,
AND THE DEMOCRATS HAVE NEVER READ IT,
BEFORE VOTING FOR IT, that was the most outrageous bill,
and the arrogance of telling the elected,
you have to vote for it before reading it,
HOW MANY PAGES DOES IT COUNTAIN?
HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE ALL OF THEM TO HAVE READ IT,
HOW CAN A PARTY IN POWER CAN PASS A BILL WITHOUT THE ELECTED READING IT?
WHAT IS THE TASK OF THE ELECTED?
WHY ARE THEY GET PAID FOR?
@Greg:
Two points here. The idea that somehow getting rid of obiecare will be bad and repubs must replace it with some other acceptable to the left program is foolish. This is like not putting out a wildfire because you’ll have to figure out what you’ll replace it with if you do. Bad law is bad law. You simply can’t recognize it.
Second provide the specific laws passed and or executive orders issued by GWB that deregulated anything related to housing from 2001 to 2008. Who sponsored those laws? What were the vote tallies?
Which Dems voted for them? I know you can’t. Come on big boy lets see the list.
It’s a plain lie that Bush deregulated anything that created the housing mess. It started long before Bush ever left Texas. There is plenty of documentation to back this up. You just won’t accept it.
Here’s a recent one.
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/042514-698502-clinton-library-doc-dump-reveals-role-in-subprime-bubble.htm
@Mully: Now, why did it take the Clinton’s so long to release this tidbit?
@Greg: Well, with the latest reports on the economy, we now see why the left is so adamant about raisng the minimum wage; due to their handling of the economy, minimum wage jobs are all that are being created (if even at a sluggish rate).
Texas is doing far better than most and exceptionally better than liberal led states. However, Texas is still part of the union and cannot work miracles around the ineptitude of the federal government. Obamacare still sticks its nose in the Texas economy, too.
AGAIN, they take the devil by the tail,
instead of working on raising the income equality,
why don’t OBAMA work on making it easy for the job maker,
so to help them be in a position to create jobs, AND STOP HAVING HIS THUGS GET IN THEIR WAY, AND SUCKING THEIR MONEY USING ANY MEANS THEY CAN, USING THE MULTI THOUSANDS REGULATION BOOK of OBAMA,
when the administration try to put screw in the business,
they end up slowing the jobs maker, who need to be free to move and in full power so to feel competent to open a market for jobs,
in other words , get off their back, they did create their business yes,
@Greg:
Fair enough.
So let’s go back and see if you can provide the same sort of analysis to the two videos that prove that Democrats are directly responsible for the financial collapse and the list of Republican health care alternatives that have been provided to you.
Unless you can find the previous session where you purportedly gave some of this in depth analysis on the Republican health care plans, then a simple link to that would suffice.
Kraken
hi,
i found that only 2.5 MILLION paid their obamacare,
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER FIVE AND I HALF,
@Mully, #28:
I wasn’t suggesting that GWB deregulated anything related to housing from 2001 to 2008. I was refuting the ridiculous assertion made in post #8 that republicans were inclined to impose the sort of regulation Rep. Richard Baker called for, but were somehow blocked from doing it by democrats.
As I stated, republicans soon had majority control of both the House and the Senate, as well as having a republican president in the White House. If republicans had actually wanted the sort of “common sense regulation” Baker was calling for, democrats wouldn’t have been able to stop them.
It’s the same situation with healthcare reform. Republicans had majorities in both houses and a republican president. If they’d wanted serious reform, there was a prolonged period when they could have passed legislation with little difficulty.
Greg
not with the never seen before demonysing GIMMICKS of the DEMOCRATS ,
TARGETTING THE REPUBLICANS, DESIGNING A PROFILE ON THEM TO THE PEOPLE,
THAT THEY ARE BAD AND ALL THE STUFF THEMSELVES ARE,
OF MALICIOUS ENTITY AND MORE AS MUCH AS THEY COULD FIND, a character assasination it’s called.
SIMILAR AS WHAT THEY DO TO THE CANDIDATES, ON ELECTION TIME,
THEY REPEAT IT AS TO PRINT IT IN THE PEOPLE’S MINDS ALONG THEIR NEFARIOUS INDOCTRINATION,
AND THAT IS THE WORSE DESTRUCTIVE ACTIONS ONE CAN EVER THINK ABOUT, ONLY THE DEMOCRATS PLAY THAT DIRTY GAME,
@Greg: Greg, are you meaning that the Republicans should demand total transparency when they ship guns to drug lords, fail to protect diplomats from terrorists, collaborate with environmental activists, and reveal when they make cushy deals to benefit their cronies? What a great idea, but didn’t someone recently promise that?
@Greg:
From:
Housing Bubble, Financial Crisis – What Happened, Who is Responsible
Please feel free to read the whole timeline. I doubt you’ll enjoy the results much.
@Aqua: Chris Dodd… Chris Dodd… that name sounds awfully familiar. Say, wasn’t the the guy that got the sweet mortgage deal from Nationwide while he was opposing all the proposed regulations? Yeah, I think that was the guy!
@Greg:
Honestly Greg, if you can type a sentence like that after watching this video, then there is clearly something wrong with you. I mean this in all sincerity with all snark aside; you need help. In response to #8 you asked, “What happened to Rep. Richard Baker’s call for more oversight and regulation?” The video in question addresses this within the first minute, by showing Mr. Baker himself making the call again in 2004. After which is footage of Democrats vehemently arguing against any such regulation.
The video clearly shows the exact opposite of your claim. So there’s a number of conclusions we can gather from this. Either you’re refusing to watch the video, because you don’t want to let go of the carefully rehearsed rhetoric that you like to parrot. You’ve watched the video, but are unable to process more than one clip edited together because it’s just too much information. You’ve watched the video, but dismiss the reality of it in favor of the narrative that the Collective has ordered you to accept. You’ve watched the video, but don’t care what the reality is, and are willing to outright lie to promote your political agenda.
Even if you’re simply a liar, which I suspect is the easiest explanation, then you need help. I am not being snarky, sarchastic, ironic, or anything else the kids are calling it these days.
Please seek professional help. You need it.
Unemployment falls to 6.3%
The civilian labor force dropped by 806,000
Recovery!
@Greg:
Finally at least one lefty will admin it was not GWB deregulating anything. Most on the left cling to that red herring. It was a government induced housing bubble.
There were people trying to rein in Freddie and Fannie, meaning more regulation, and got shot down numerous times. The old tried an true race card was played against them.
Others had just as tough a time, just go look at the testimony of Armando Falcon.
@Kraken: A .1% growth rate=a drop of .4 points in the unemployment rate. Hmmmm.
Then President George Bush continually received backlash by the democrats/liberals – in the very same way as ANY Republican does, now today, when ANY consideration is made or ANY Attempt to REFORMING ANY HURTFUL bogus “Social Justice” agendas created by and be dammed!! – carried out by the very same democrats/liberals under the PHONY GUISE OF…..”Caring” for the little guy….all the while screwing everyone else!!!!!!
Don’t believe me? Tell me the Phony Compassion of Obamacare IS NOT HURTING ANYONE???? Tell me that this phony Law called Obamacare (ACA) did not TAKE AWAY legitimate AND ACTUAL “HEALTH –CARE” from millions of people? – People who already HAD HEALTH CARE who, through no fault of their own, had it snatched away?? Inclusive of their doctors…. And what do they have now? A “Government Issued” Insurance Policy NO CARE but, they do have an “Insurance Policy” with astronomical Premiums and Deductibles…..
But, But, everything is honky dory right Greg?
Yet Greg, on this very day, is not even considering any repeal or reform because again, it is being brought up by Republicans…and instead, Greg in the true spirit of democrat/liberals is giving backlash to anyone who even wants to consider repeal or reform – much like George Bush and Republicans received when they tried to reform Fanny/Freddie….and sub-prime mortgage era…
In case Greg conveniently forgot:
Greg you are a blowhard just like your friend Barney!
Brookings: More businesses dying than being created — for first time ever
Recovery!