Dusting off the Old Democrat Playbook

Now that Congress is back in session and the Health Care repeal is at center stage, the same old Democrat playbook gets trotted out.

If you are relatively new to politics or young, you might be taken in by the strategy the Democrats and the media have planned and have started enacting. To those of us old enough to remember the last century, their desperation is obvious.

Like a salesman knocking on the door until he finds the right tack to get you to open it, the Democrat Party  has several tactics.

The first surfaced with the AP poll. Step 1 is bogus polls. The naive will accept what the results are and then begin to doubt themselves. Newscasters and pundits shook their heads yesterday claiming that support for health care repeal has fallen.  Now 40% support repeal and 41% do not. The implication is that Republicans are now going against the current tide of public opinion so why not drop the whole thing now?

Rush Limbaugh and a few other level headed conservatives took a stark look at the poll. What they found was disengenuous. “It’s a full court press trying to negate the Republican victory in November,” Limbaugh said. “The sample was miscast and flawed. Before the election they polled 48% of voters leaning Republican and 42% leaning Democrat.  This time they polled 42% Democrats and 36% Republicans, a drop of 12% and so the survey dropped 11 points.” The survey also didn’t use likely or registered voters as they had before, but a sample of 1,001 random people.

In other words, if you control the metrics, you control the outcome.

Having “proved” that the American people don’t want repeal, the next step is to attack the price. “It’s going to cost a fortune to repeal it” cry the Democrats. Paul Krugman at the New York Times argues this insane argument. “Health Reform, says the Budget Officer, will increase Social Security revenues and reduce Medicare costs. But the GOP analysis says that these sums don’t count, because some people have said that these savings would also extend the life of these programs’ trust funds, so counting these savings as deficit reduction would be ‘double counting’ because well, actually it doesn’t make any sense, but it sounds impressive.”

Does Krugman really think Americans buy the argument that not spending is going to cost more than spending? I think I saw that comedy routine in the Marx Brothers. How much is it if you sing, Groucho asks? Chico tells him. How much if you don’t sing, Groucho asks? “You can’t afford it,” Chico replies.

We saw the other ploy, distraction, on view last week in Tucson. Wall to wall coverage forced the health care repeal vote off the monitor. This is a tricky maneuver for many; it can be effective enough to make you forget they’re using it. Tragic as the event was, only 6 people died and the Congresswoman lived. People get killed in larger numbers than that frequently in the news. It doesn’t require the president to address everyone. Indeed, it ends up having an ambulance chasing quality.

Cousin to distraction is the blow up technique. That’s where even the most mundane remark/action/comment gets built into mammoth proportions. Take Sarah Palin’s “blood libel” remark. Most Americans probably shrugged; the pundits acted as if she has repudiated Jesus (no, sorry, they’d probably like that); make that George Washington (oops, they might like that, too); well, you fill in the blank. Expect the race card to get thrown in as the Democrats get even more desperate.

The civility argument falls into the “Mommy, he hit me” category. That will accelerate, particularly with the State of the Union address which the media will use to garner a higher approval rating for Obama. The gullible who live in the Republic of Nice are particularly receptive to this technique.

All this means that 2012 is weighing heavily on Obama’s mind. Everything he does from now on will be with an eye to that November. If the Democrats can garner just a few people from these plans he might win reelection.

Don’t fall victim to this strategy, but recognize it for what it is: pathetic.

... Leave a Reply