If the existing Mainstream Media is prone to prejudice or outright bias, Republicans need to apply polite but firm pressure on Internet gatekeepers to change the shape, size, and scope of what is considered Mainstream.
As promised in our last article, we want to make some specific and concrete suggestions about what GOP leadership can do to alter the balance of power within the so-called Mainstream - or widely read - portion of the Media, especially focusing on Internet-based Media.
There are two paths towards correcting this bias, seen as widespread and persistent, which presents Democratic Party candidates, pundits, ideology, and agendas in a favorable light, while presenting Republican candidates, pundits, ideology, and agendas in a far less favorable light.
First, we can attempt to assist existing publications and sites, including social media sites, which have a stake in appearing unbiased and politically inclusive. We can work with them directly and help them recruit and feature GOP writers, editors, candidates, and viewpoints, while changing various internal technical factors, which may be impeding their sites' avowed neutrality.
It is also important to work with Internet gatekeepers, such as search engines and media consolidators, whose current pattern and practice may be geared - either accidentally or deliberately - to featuring publications, individual articles, podcasts, and other kinds of media which boost the exposure of Democrats and their favored constituencies, while stifling reader and viewer exposure for Republicans and our important constituencies.
The second path towards a fairer and more inclusive Mainstream is taking an active role in creating brand-new Internet entities - publications, social media sites, GOP-oriented search engines and Republican-friendly media consolidators - which together would form an Alternative Mainstream Media universe, not just supplementing what exists now, but also, if correctly promoted, serving as an effective GOP Internet infrastructure.
Republican readers and viewers would be able to turn to our sites first in their search for news, research, opinion, and interactivity which treats Republicans and Republican thought fairly and honestly, without having to wade through the virtual morass of bias or sometimes outright smarminess that dominates Internet political news and commentary now.
The above is not an either-or prescription, and both paths toward change have to be pursued simultaneously, with the endorsement and guidance of the RNC and major think tanks, candidate organizations, and PACs. As many and as varied Republican groups as possible at the national, state, and local level should be persuaded to join in this concerted effort.
Here, then, some specific suggestions, as we work towards a Media Mainstream which includes and welcomes Republicans:
The Already-Existing MSM - Stop Blackballing Us and Grant Us Full Membership
Maybe it's because so many of the current crop of webmasters and others involved in nitty-gritty Internet operations are males under the age of 30, with technical educations and lifetimes of playing video games and minor league hacking behind them. (No, this is not my personal bias speaking. It is quite literally true.)
Whatever the reasons, the existing Mainstream Media now has the feel of a jokey and smarmy Animal House-like fraternity, with the Nerds enjoying their full Revenge and relegating whomever they see as the Clean-Cut Kids to near invisibility.
Think of the GOP as the Clean-Cut Kids, being blackballed mercilessly and kept out of the Web Visibility frat house.
No matter. Turn the other cheek. Let bygones be bygones. The Past is just Prologue. And all those good, wholesome, moral attitudes, which most Republicans already live by, anyway.
This time can be different, if - again - the RNC, the PACs, the GOP oriented pundits and think tanks, and every other Republican-leaning group we can think of comes aboard and acts in a concerted fashion.
Some of the key things we need to do or have done by the gatekeepers are technical and mechanical:
***** I admit that I myself am not enamored of SEO/SEM techniques - search engine optimization and management - which are basically artificial, algorithmically-based formulae for upping one's Internet stats of various kinds by "sharing" - i.e. stealing - other sites' stats and/or improving one's visibility on search engines by knocking other sites' search visibility down a notch.
I do not utilize SEO/SEM in terms of my own blogs, sites, or Internet groups. But that's just me.
The cold, hard fact is that the Democratic Party, its candidates, its PACs, and its supporting groups of various kinds pretty much all are slavishly devoted to SEO/SEM, while the majority of Republican Party operatives, activists, candidates, and groups won't even know what I'm talking about.
To level the playing field, pure and simple, the GOP, under the aegis of the RNC, needs to allow existing staff members - we're certain they're there already, mostly very young and mostly former marketing majors - to pull out all the stops on GOP-oriented SEO/SEM. Let this be these staffers' near-full-time job for a few short months, and we'll see marked improvement almost immediately.
***** One very specific technical improvement, not SEO/SEM-linked, is pressuring the search engines - all of 'em, domestically and those based abroad - to make sure GOP-favorable publications, blogs, newsletters, pollsters, researchers, pundits, and social media sites are all included in the News listings, as well as in the much broader Web listings, at their sites.
Although the Web listings, I find, are far superior in terms of inclusiveness and accuracy, they are almost totally ignored by news consolidators and news "scrapers," which are generally the vehicles for getting topics, candidates, and authors into the "trending" and "political buzz" Mainstreams, which now dominate the Internet, whether we classically-trained journalists, researchers, and activists like it or not.
These vehicles - consolidators and scrapers - are fixated on News, rather than Web, listings. And some from-the-top persuasion from the RNC and other Republican influencers would, I believe, elicit immediate "Sure, we'd be happy to," compliance from most search engines, which are themselves fixated on increasing Internet viewership from actual Humans, rather than Script Bots.
Recent research shows Internet readers and viewers - so-called "eyeballs"- are now only 35 percent or so actual Human beings, with 65 percent of Internet-based "eyeballs" belonging to Script Bots, powered by artificial intelligence.
We Republicans on the Internet tend to be actual Humans! So we're really very, very valuable as "eyeballs." We just need to stress this point and be as persuasive as we can about it.
***** Re the publications which make up the existing Mainstream Media: Whether or not politics is their major beat, I think many of them can be persuaded to improve their reporting and editorial coverage of the GOP, if we can show that it is to their own advantage to do so.
We - again, collectively, under the aegis of the RNC and major Republican groups - should make these very simple and totally true arguments:
***There are at least as many Americans who identify as Republicans as Democrats, with more than half of Independents now trending towards GOP candidates in this election cycle.
***There are very broad spectrums of political opinion, within both major Parties and within the citizenry as a whole, on any number of key current issues, which means taking a narrow partisan stance on any of these issues is an egregious mistake.
***Populism is a vibrant force within both major Parties as well as within the electorate as a whole, so that being too "politically correct" is now looked at askance by what is probably a significant majority of potential readers and viewers.
***And the MSM itself has become more and more mistrusted, especially by Republicans and Independents.
***Ergo, Fellas: You are losing readers and viewers, and you will continue to lose them, unless you begin to shape up, look sharp, say your mea culpas, and decide to tailor headlines, reporting, and coverage to all Americans, not just a small partisan slice of the electorate which shares the views of your (too-young, too-Elitist, too-biased, and insufficiently-tolerant-of-all-viewpoints) current cadre of editors and reporters.
***** Moving on to the social media sites: There, a combination of editorially-oriented persuasion and operational tweaking may be needed.
Many of the major social media sites have an editorial component, like LinkedIn's Pulse, which features articles from whatever group of "thought leaders" in-house editors favor. And in tune with the bias and prejudice throughout today's MSM, these "thought leaders" have tended to be Democratic Party-friendly and/or to write about topics and push agendas that could come straight from a staff memo at Hillary Clinton's campaign.
The social media sites are stubborn and set in their ways, so it's going to take steady, polite but firm, pressure from the Republican establishment to persuade them to alter their editorial focus. Start applying such pressure now and use the same arguments we outlined in our discussion of existing Mainstream Media publications above.
On the operational side, there are quite a few member-owned and member-managed groups at social media sites which purport to be "Republican," but are, in fact, extremely narrowly-focused and exclusive in their approach, seeming to feature a never-ending stream of postings by wild-eyed men (literally - their official photos all look like Rasputin on Acid, and none of them are women), covering incendiary topics in incendiary formats.
These groups and these posts seem caricatures to us, rather than legitimate political discourse - so much so that we have often wondered whether those managing and posting in such groups were not actually Democratic Party operatives having "fun" with elaborate Dirty Tricks.
In any case, Republican leaders' stance so far has been similar to its stance towards rabid and rabble-rousing talk radio hosts, who claim to be part of the GOP, but often do Republicans more harm than good.
Social media sites are different from the public universe of radio channels, however, since radio-based free-for-all sites are self-selecting, and few listeners who don't want to be there will be there.
In contrast, the major Internet social media sites have very wide and diverse audiences, and the Party should want to make a favorable impression in terms of these sites' entire audience base, rather than "turning off" potential GOP readers and viewers.
So perhaps we should at least consider politely persuading the talk-radio-style, in-your-face "Republican" groups to cool things down a bit; try to be polite to all fellow Republicans and non-Republicans who venture there; and also try to solicit at least some material which is thoughtful and substantive, rather than posted for pure shock value.
My Way and the Highway: Working Towards a Broader, More Inclusive Alternative GOP Mainstream
The second path towards shaping a Republican-friendly MSM is expanding what's already part of the Mainstream with brand-new publications, social media sites, media consolidators, and search engines of our own.
***** The effort can - and probably should - start with the RNC's own existing sites, which some have said are difficult to use; tend not to be based in real time; have too little material included; and don't sufficiently allow the Voices of rank-and-file Republicans - or even officeholders from the states and local jurisdictions - to be heard.
The Party needs to prove - and probably to state - that it truly and honestly wants its image and its practice to be that of the inclusive, vibrant, non-politically-correct "Big Tent" Party this nation now wants and needs. Everything we proceed to do will follow from taking this statement to heart and living by it as a Party and as individual Republicans.
***** For instance, one RNC-sanctioned site I believe we could set up immediately and easily might be a comprehensive, continually-updated on-line GOP magazine, welcoming and including articles and other media from any bona fide GOP'er who wishes to submit them.
By all means, impose strict editorial standards on such material, rejecting anything that is poorly written or unprofessionally produced. But encourage journalists, researchers, academics, strategists, and pundits across the Republican political spectrum to contribute. Encourage submissions from those working at the state and local level, rather than nationally. And encourage discussions of topics to which the existing MSM is giving short shrift or ignoring completely.
If well done - and why shouldn't it be, given the degree of raw intellect, sophistication, and passion prevalent throughout our Party? - such a GOP magazine would quickly become the "go-to" source for Republicans on the Internet - the first place they "traveled to" when coming on-line at the start of their days.
Moreover, we'd also hope that very quickly, the existing Mainstream Media would make such a site a "go-to" source for their own reporting and editorial efforts, automatically forcing them to begin to understand what Republicans nationwide are thinking about, care about, and want the rest of the nation - and the world - to know about us.
***** Similarly, although not necessarily under the aegis of the RNC, we believe it would be very beneficial if several new social media sites aimed at a Republican audience were formed over the course of the next few months.
Such sites could have editorial components, where news stories and other media from a GOP viewpoint could be featured. But they would primarily be vehicles for Republicans to connect with, correspond with, and have Internet conversations with one another, within a friendly, respectful, and polite environment, where every site user were given an equal Voice.
Clearly, such sites could become especially useful if elected officials, candidates, and activists of all kinds and from every level of government and the Party utilized them in an honest, active, and consistent manner, truly seeking to make friends, exchange ideas, explicate policies and agendas, and develop constituencies both locally and nationally.
We're hoping that one such site will be developed under our Party of Yes imprimatur. But we'd be delighted if our intended site were only one among several, with specialized social media sites for Republicans part of the mix: sites geared to academics and other scholars, for example, or sites geared to local government initiatives.
***** We also think it might be an excellent idea for the RNC and other Republican leaders to give their official blessing to one or several consolidator sites and/or GOP-oriented search engines.
These would be vehicles for finding and cataloguing new GOP-friendly blogs, academic articles, think tank white papers, polls, videos, and other media on a daily or more frequent basis - in the case of search engines - and choosing the most interesting among them as daily or more frequent "feeds" to subscribers who are interested - in the case of consolidators.
We would expect that such subscribers to GOP feeds would soon include many reporters and editors who are part of the current Mainstream, because their jobs would be made easier and more efficient by subscribing.
(Note that "subscriptions" via feeds generally do not mean paid subscriptions - although they sometimes do. A feed subscription, in Web parlance, is placing oneself as an individual, organization, or fellow media outlet on an Internet mailing list to receive updated information.)
End-Note
We've made the various suggestions in this story in the spirit of flexible cooperation and friendship towards every person and institution within the Republican fold.
Under no circumstance do we wish to criticize what has been done up to this point. We believe that as Republicans, we have all acted in good faith, working hard to make our Voices heard within the existing Mainstream Media, despite its enormous limitations.
In return we've all-too-often been attacked, lied about, scorned, and ridiculed. Even more significant - and even worse - Media outlets which are clearly not the Party's friends have consistently and insistently attempted to steer us in directions which are not in our best interests, operationally or ideologically.
Many of us believe it is extraordinarily positive and well-nigh miraculous that so many Republicans - candidates, officeholders, activists, and rank-and-file alike - have spontaneously taken up the cry of "Mainstream Media Fairness" at this particular juncture. Through our collective action, we can make immense improvements prior to and throughout Election Year 2016.
As promised in our last story, we want to explicate briefly once more just what we hope to accomplish through our Party of Yes efforts on the Internet and in social media.
We're reiterating this agenda, because after the quite extraordinary and brand-new kind of activism addressing both the GOP presidential debates and their format and the need to strike back against an out-of-control "Mainstream Media," a large number of Republicans seem to be coming around to views which Robert, Ellen, and the Party of Yes have been urging our fellow GOP'ers to adopt.
So once more, the main tasks before us:
***** Push the existing "Mainstream Media," especially on the Internet, to treat the Republican Party, its candidates, its activists, its commentators, and its Base of members - every bit as large and respectable and influential as the Democratic Party's membership Base - with seriousness, humanity, decency, and "gravitas," according to the GOP's central place within American politics and American life.
We will devote the next article in this series to some practical suggestions about how to do this, preferably with the full support of the RNC and the full roster of GOP presidential candidates and their campaign staffs.
***** Focus especially on establishing a more active and comprehensive "Big Tent" Republican presence within social media, including growing our LinkedIn and Facebook Groups and gently persuading some other existing Groups, which claim to be Republican in outlook, but which paint a limited, strident, or unattractive portrait of GOP thought, to expand their horizons and welcome the full spectrum of Republicans into their narrow arenas.
***** Set up a dedicated Party of Yes Internet site, if possible in conjunction with the RNC and other important Republican oversight groups. We'd also be delighted to assist the RNC in making its own existing Internet forums easier to use and more welcoming to GOP'ers of all stripes, if they'll let us.
***** Try - hard! - to persuade the RNC, the (few) parts of the "MSM" in GOP or neutral hands, and influential GOP think tanks and advocacy groups to embrace as an important "outreach" constituency the fully one-half of Republican voters who are age 50 and over.
Our "Gray Base" within the GOP is in no way a liability, as so many Democratic Party operatives and publications have been telling us. In contrast, it is a significant asset for and to the Republican Party, with over 2 in 5 Americans now age 50 or over and close to 50 percent of all US voters part of our "Gray" population - not only in 2016, but also in the future presidential cycles of 2020, 2024, and 2028.
We will likely publish quite a few additional stories on the GOP's (wonderful, helpful, incredibly important) "Gray Base" over the course of the upcoming election year.
***** In addition to persuading the existing "Mainstream Media" to work towards eliminating its bias against Republicans, our ideas, and our candidates, the Party of Yes believes that the GOP needs to create a wide and inclusive "Alternative Mainstream Media," especially on the Internet, consisting of publications and social media sites geared towards Republicans and our interests.
No better use can be made of GOP funds and influence in this historically important - indeed, crucial - presidential election cycle than actively and diligently working towards transforming what is considered "Mainstream" and making sure that Republicans and Republican ideas and agendas are as well-represented within Media channels as are Democrats and their ideas and agendas.
***** We had hoped all of the GOP presidential candidates and their staffs would quickly choose to join our new Party of Yes Groups at LinkedIn and Facebook and utilize them as "base camps" within social media to give interviews, contribute to opinion pieces, and circulate their ideas within social media under our aegis.
That has not happened yet, but we still hope it will happen as this election cycle proceeds.
***** We also wish to use both the LinkedIn and Facebook Groups and the future dedicated Party of Yes site, as useful "base camps" for GOP candidates and activists from state and local constituencies.
We maintain that the majority of existing GOP sites, even those run by the RNC, have been somewhat difficult to use, nowhere near well-known enough - certainly not utilized enough! - and perhaps not yet inclusive enough to stimulate the enthusiastic activism of Republicans across the Party's nationwide political spectrum.
Making a dedicated Party of Yes site a key focus in efforts to set up an "Alternative Mainstream for Republicans" would be useful, we believe, not only because the Founders are champing at the bit to get this effort rolling, but also because we believe the Party of Yes moniker and what it stands for are finally being understood and accepted by many leaders and activists within the Party.
Republicans, not the Other Major Party, have now unfurled the true "Big Tent" and are happy to welcome all constituencies.
Republicans, not the Other Major Party, are demonstrating that we shun the narrowly "politically correct," in favor of respectful, but also vibrant and forthright discussion and debate on key issues facing our nation.
Republicans, not the Other Major Party, are striving to give a Voice that is heard to every individual and every group within our fold, rather than permitting a tiny cadre of arrogant "thought leaders" and celebrities, anointed by fiat, to tell the rest of America what to do and how to think.
We Republicans - here and now -are the revivified and reignited Party of Yes. And the Party of "Yes, We Can."
The past seven weeks of GOP turmoil may seem more like seven years, so much has happened. But we contend it's a healthy and productive turmoil, in stark contrast to the goose-stepping "solidarity" of the Other Side.
Right before the Reagan Library debate on September 16th, we decided - intentionally - to refrain from commentary on the Republican presidential race and related events, hoping to observe what "shook out."
And indeed, in the immortal words of Jerry Lee Lewis, "There's been a whole lotta shakin' goin' on."
It's been quite unusual shakin', however, with events unfolding in ways hardly anyone would have imagined a few short months ago.
Below, our take on some of these events and others to come.
But first, a word on the Party of Yes and how we hope to proceed.
In the next blog in this series, which we'll post tomorrow, we will restate just what it is we're working towards; how we hope to accomplish it; and why we urge the RNC and other GOP leading lights - including every Republican candidate, Caucus, and PAC - to support these efforts.
We maintain that the vast majority of the so-called Mainstream Media, particularly on the Internet, are firmly biased - in fact, prejudiced - supporters of the Other Major Party and its candidates.
We can't change Them. But we can change Us - how we present ourselves; how we work with other Republicans - all other Republicans; and how we unite our various factions, continue to expand our Base, and fashion and express strong and coherent messages about the issues which unify us and our overall values and principles as committed members of the GOP.
Much more about this in tomorrow's story and future stories.
Back to That "Shakin' Goin' On"
Here are some of the major GOP events of the past seven weeks and our personal "take" on these events, from our Party of Yes perspective: positive, optimistic, constructive, and supporting an inclusive "Big Tent" Republican Party.
*****Rick Perry Returns to His Ranch: Five days before the Reagan Library debate, on September 11th, Candidate Rick Perry, the popular, long-time former Governor of Texas, bowed out of the race, after failing to catch fire with big donors and running dangerously short of cash with which to campaign.
Our quick take: We very much like Governor Perry and are sorry he decided not to hang on. Largely the victim of the Mainstream Media and its (way too large) effect on donors, he was ridiculed by various Pundit-Bullies - and by fellow GOP Candidate Trump - for such shallow reasons as switching to black horn-rimmed glasses "to appear more intelligent."
(In reality, Perry's eyesight has probably deteriorated with age - as anyone over age 50 will tell you it's apt to do. Many people find that the alternative to glasses, contact lenses, cause too much glare when combined with the bright lights used for television or press conferences.)
Perry, among the oldest Baby Boomers - as are Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, with John Kasich, Mike Huckabee, Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina all age 60 or older - should be roundly applauded as the sole Candidate so far to acknowledge the importance of our "Gray" population over age 50, who will make up about 1/2 of all voters in 2016 and have lately skewed very strongly towards the Republican Party.
We believe Perry should have stressed his support for the Party's "Gray Base" even more vehemently. And while the Governor did highlight the State of Texas's superb educational improvement and job creation record during his tenure, he could have become the major champion of Resources and Manufacturing, Texas and other "Red State" mainstays, by stressing how these parts of the economy have suffered under President Obama's ill-thought-out anti-Resources, anti-Manufacturing, too-strong-USDollar policies.
In other words, Perry, the quintessential Texan, should have been more Texan.
***** Scott Walker Walks His Blazing Career Back Home to Wisconsin: Five days after the second debate at the Reagan Library, on September 21st, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, at one time considered the front-runner for the nomination, bowed out of the Presidential race. Like Perry, Walker cited lagging largesse from big donors as a key deterrent to making an effective bid.
Our quick take: Walker's abbreviated candidacy shocked pretty much everyone, including us, not least because he had been considered - the Mainstream Media told us he was! - the "personal pick" of the all-powerful Koch Brothers and their all-powerful circle of all-powerful people.
I guess they changed their mind.
From our perspective of looking for the best in each GOP candidate, we thought Governor Walker put in truly excellent performances at both GOP debates in which he participated. He has a lovely - even a "sweet" - personality, exuding the same kind of Midwestern wholesomeness that first brought Ronald Reagan to public awareness.
But from our "Big Tent" perspective of inclusiveness - which also recognizes the need to bring Independents and Democrat-crossover votes to the GOP - it's possible that Governor Walker's celebrity as an anti-union activist harmed his incipient campaign.
We gather from talking to those with far better knowledge of Midwestern politics than we have that there's a fair bit of pure misunderstanding surrounding this issue. Walker has been strongly anti-public sector unions, which he rightly sees as bloated and operating in an antiquated fashion. But he has, insist colleagues, a far more lenient view of private sector unions, especially those in the Manufacturing industries, important to any economic rebound in the Midwest and the nation. Walker needs to stress this and to beef up his standing among blue-collar voters in general in any future runs for national office.
It's also possible that the very fact of the Koch interests' early support for Walker - again, touted in story after story from the Mainstream press - proved to be a barrier to his candidacy, rather than a boost, in a cycle when many Republicans seem to be turning away from "kingmakers" and their perceived interference with the independence of the rank-and-file.
***** The Fall of John Boehner and the Rise of the Freedom Caucus - Followed by the Fall of Kevin McCarthy and the Rise of Him? Her? Him? Him? Him? Her? - And Yes!, There's Paul Ryan On a Beautiful White Steed
After months of wrangling over what seemed like dozens of issues both important and less-so - and their related legislation - House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, who had been in Congress for 25 years, House Republican leader for almost 10 years, and Speaker for 5 years, announced on September 23rd that he would not only be resigning his post as Speaker, but also retiring and giving up his House seat.
Blame or praise for Boehner's momentous resignation - or cries of "Who the heck are they?" - fell at the feet of a group of about 40 GOP House members, previously not widely-heralded, known as the Freedom Caucus, although Boehner had been clashing on various issues with far better-known and more influential groups within the House, too, including the Republican Study Committee, the Conservative caucus which has over 170 members, including many long-time House leaders.
Boehner's second-in-command, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, immediately stepped up to the plate and said he wanted to be Speaker - only to withdraw his name from contention a mere 9 days later, after putting his foot in his mouth - or so the Media widely said - over comments about the Benghazi subcommittee and its efforts to investigate Hillary Clinton's handling of the attack at the Libyan consulate and its aftermath.
McCarthy's withdrawal led to a feeding frenzy in that portion of the political Mainstream Media which leans towards Democrats - i.e. pretty much all of it. As previously stated, we intend to devote future blogs to discussions of the current irresponsibility of the "MSM" and what Republicans need to do about it - fast.
After McCarthy took his name out of the hopper, a plethora of other possibile names poured forth. About twenty days ago, however, interest coalesced quickly around House Ways and Means Committee chairman and former Vice-Presidential candidate Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
A vote of GOP members was taken last Wednesday, October 26th, and on Thursday, October 27th, Ryan was formally sworn in as the House's 54th Speaker.
Our quick take: Speaker Boehner was probably prudent to leave his post at this historical juncture, with a distinguished career of accomplishments in the House behind him, while the immediate future for the GOP House caucus could remain somewhat turbulent, as members struggle to reconcile Party factions, while striving to force the Opposing Party to make mistakes and take the role, in gridiron parlance, of Defense, after being on an Offensive - pun intended - roll the past year or more.
If new Speaker Ryan is seen as the Great Conciliator going forward, by all means, we approve. Best wishes and good luck to him, as well as to retired Speaker Boehner.
In our next two series blogs, we will further explicate what we hope to accomplish with the Party of Yes, after demonstrating why we think such action is needed so urgently.
Very well-received story by Party of Yes co-managers Robert Heiler and Ellen Brandt - i.e. ME! - out this past Friday at popular website Real Clear Politics.
by Robert Heiler Conventional wisdom insists that moves within a political party of
the Big Tent variety are inherently, on the level of policy or doctrine,
weakening, conciliatory, or indicative of appeasement. Expressions of
this characterization of the Party of Yes effort can be expected to
range from allegations of doctrinal heresy to outright charges of
full-spectrum RINOism. Like most conventional wisdom, this insistence will be strident, occasionally persuasive, and entirely wrong. One of the main reasons that the GOP needs to host a healthy internal
debate about the ways to move America in the proper direction is that
such debate has become essentially impossible with Democrats.
The
Democratic Party in the post-Obama era is held in such thrall to Leftist
"Political Correctness" that its positions are outside the bounds of
what was somewhat recently considered the mainstream. The defining
characteristic of the Left of the Limousine Liberals is that its
nostrums depend, at some level, on fundamental denial of obvious
reality. Rachel Dolezal is black and “Caitlyn” Jenner a woman simply because
they say so. “Global warming,” renamed “climate change,” is a dire,
urgent threat despite the fact that the globe has, ever-rising carbon
dioxide levels notwithstanding, cooled continuously for nearly two
decades. It is possible to add 30 million people to the rolls of those
with health insurance without adding “a single dime” to the deficit –
and if you like your plan and doctor, you can keep them. “Terrorist
attacks” must be called “man-caused disasters.” There is not a “smidgen”
of corruption at the IRS. A federal minimum wage of $15 per hour will
not eliminate jobs. Planned Parenthood is not selling fetal body parts,
it is “donating them and receiving compensation for costs incurred.”
Saying “All lives matter,” is an act requiring apology and recantation.
Iranian mullahs indicating approval of “Death to America” chants do not
really mean it, and are worthy negotiating partners. If you’ve got a
business, you didn’t build that. This list could go on. Here is the point: whether the subject is
culture, economics, foreign policy, or national defense, much of what
the Limousine Liberal agenda advances as thought requires, to use
Secretary Clinton’s memorable phrase, the "willing suspension of
disbelief." For that reason, the party that is controlled by the
Limousine Liberals has become, in many substantive debates, a
non-participant. In this way the presidential candidacy of Senator
Bernie Sanders is political synecdoche. Despite the fact that he was
until recently an Independent, he is the perfect symbol of the party he
now seeks to lead: a disheveled, constantly outraged irrelevance,
muttering paeans to Socialist ideas that have failed always, everywhere,
that they have been attempted. If you doubt this description of current affairs, consider the
dedication of the Democrats to "Political Correctness." Then consider
this: What, precisely, does the phrase “Politically Correct” indicate?
It represents an alternative to simply correct, really correct,
obviously correct. It is literally an attempt to define what is
"Correct" without recourse to investigation of what is "Actual." If the
indications of delusion were any more straightforward than that, proper
treatment would require Haldol. Notwithstanding this disappearance of a loyal opposition, we still
have a Republic to run, if we can keep it. That is why the Trumpettes
vs. Cruzers vs. Randulans vs. I heart Huckabees, et. al., cage-match has
got to stop. It risks handing the keys to the kingdom to people who are
literally out of touch with reality. And so, we have begun this effort known as the Party of Yes. Its
purpose is to foster the robust, but respectful debate that a healthy
Republic requires, free of the reality-denying distortions of the
Limousine Liberals – and also free of the Party they control and the
large portion of the mainstream Media that carries their water, massages
their feet, and augments their entirely emotional appeal. We seek a
discourse on Ideas rather than Personalities, real arguments rather than
tarted-up classical fallacies. If you are committed to restoring the American Dream and this
nation’s proper place in world affairs, please join us. We would love to
hear your thoughts.
(This is a version of a story - an excellent one! - posted earlier this week in LinkedIn's Pulse by the Party Of Yes effort's new Co-Manager, the distinguished Conservative journalist and theorist, Robert Heiler. EBB)
******************************************************
Link to the Party of YES Group at LinkedIn:
Link to the landing page for Bring Back the Meritocracy!, founder Ellen Brandt's project to help the estimated 400 million "Highly-Educated But Under-Employed" in the United States and abroad:
Something momentous is occurring in the 2016 presidential election cycle, and it centers on a revival of the Politics of Inclusion, particularly within our Republican Party.
Although there are signs of this changing the past few weeks, the
Democrats still cluster around a doctrinaire candidate, representing the
status quo ante and anointed as the official frontrunner years before
the nominating process began.
In stark contrast, the GOP field
is as wide open as it has ever been within our Party's
more-than-160-year history. Far from embracing the status quo, the 17
declared Republican presidential candidates represent a spectrum of
experience, opinions, doctrines, and agendas as wide and inclusive as
America itself is at this important juncture in our political history.
And most of our fellow Republicans believe this is a good thing, beneficial to our Party and beneficial to our country.
Republicans are once again declaring ourselves the Big Tent Party,
welcome to all and strong and secure enough to foster vibrant debate
and discussion, as we work to bridge our differences and come up with
viable consensus solutions to our nation's problems and ways to embrace
our coming opportunities.
Towards this end, we have established the Party of Yes blog and a Party of Yes Group at LinkedIn, with the intention of setting up a similar Group at Facebook
and a dedicated interactive website within the near future. At some
point, we may also choose to register formally as a nonprofit
organization.
Our purposes in founding this Group and this blog are threefold:
First, we wish to enlist the participation of both Republicans with mostly Moderate views (like Ellen) and Republicans with mostly Conservative views (like Robert) to debate the GOP's points of dissension and conflict, not
in order to enshrine them as insoluble, but rather to help figure out
ways to compromise, "horse trade," and reach viable consensus on issues,
so we can present a united Party front as we approach the 2016 election.
Second, we intend to do a regular series of interviews - positive interviews, in the spirit of permitting and welcoming all
voices - with most of the GOP declared presidential candidates and
various other theorists, activists, movers and shakers within today's
vibrant GOP.
We intend to present articles based on these interviews to the general LinkedIn (and soon Facebook)
audiences, hoping that these interesting and valuable presentations
will eventually make their way throughout the entire Internet.
Some of this will be corrective in nature, since we believe the
so-called "mainstream media" on the Internet, far too concentrated and
in too few figurative "hands," has been narrowly focused on certain
candidates and issues to the exclusion of most others, giving a false
picture of the race for the presidency and of the range of ideas and
issues Republicans care most about right now.
We also intend to begin a series of issues-oriented articles,
focusing on specific issues per-story and garnering the ideas and
stances on each issue from a range of candidates and other influential
Republicans.
These stories will also be posted in the main LinkedIn content streams, as well as within the LinkedIn and Facebook Groups. And we are soliciting short opinion pieces written by others within the GOP, including articles about state and local issues,
written by sitting government officials; candidates for state or local
office; and the activists backing such officials and candidates.
Along these lines, we are actively seeking one or several active politicians as co-moderators for the Groups, the blog, and the eventual website.
We would prefer people who are long-time respected activists within the
Party and who have held political office in the past, but who are not
currently running for any office. Please contact Robert or Ellen, if you
are interested.
Our third purpose in forming the Party of Yes
is as a vehicle for gently, but persistently, persuading major social
media sites, search engines, and general news publications on-line to
pay far more attention to the GOP, our candidates, our issues, our
constituencies, and our agendas.
Because on-line media have
become so extraordinarily concentrated within the past few years, there
is now, we believe, an ingrained bias favoring a handful of
attention-getters and opinion-makers, badly neglecting those who haven't
managed to shout the loudest or have somehow been "anointed" as worth
hearing.
This is a serious problem with the kind of
presidential race we have this cycle, with so many valuable voices which
need to be heard not being heard to a very great extent.
And the situation may become even more upsetting, if important state
and local races and initiatives are starved for needed attention and
coverage.
At Party of Yes, we are going to
"nudge" the Internet-based mainstream - nicely and politely, but in
dogged fashion - to expand and increase coverage of the vibrant and
exciting Party our GOP has now become.
Please join with us in this important effort.
(This is a version of an article posted on LinkedIn's Pulse earlier this week, formally introducing our Party of Yes effort to LinkedIn's multimillion-user public worldwide.)
******************************************************
Link to the Party of YES Group at LinkedIn:
Link to the landing page for Bring Back the Meritocracy!, founder Ellen Brandt's project to help the estimated 400 million "Highly-Educated But Under-Employed" in the United States and abroad:
by Dr. Ellen Brandt As Founder of the Party of Yes,
I am pleased to announce that the superb journalist and political
theorist Robert Heiler, a long-time voice for moral and sane
Conservative principles within the GOP, will be joining with us as
Co-Manager and Co-Moderator of the Party of Yes blog - soon to have a dedicated Internet site - as well our new Party of Yes Group at LinkedIn and a similar Group at Facebook, to be launched within the very near future.
As many know, I consider myself the Centrist of Centrists, a voice for
political Moderates within the GOP. I believe it is therefore necessary
to co-manage both the blog and the Groups with a respected and
articulate Conservative, since the major goal of the Party of Yes
effort is to bridge the gap between Conservatives and Moderates within
the Republican Party, as we head into the vitally important - indeed,
historic - election of 2016.
Robert Heiler is just such a
Conservative theorist, respected by his journalistic and political peers
and adept at articulating their interests and concerns.
A
graduate of Arizona State University and the Public Policy Fellowship
Program of the Institute for Advanced Strategic & Political Studies
in Washington, D.C., he previously has written speeches and consulted on
message for Senators, Representatives, Governors, Presidential
candidates, and state-level officials across the country.
Robert is committed to a debate within the GOP that accords respect to all of its members.
Robert and I have posted a short article on LinkedIn's Pulse, outlining our near-term and longer-term goals for the Party of Yes Group at LinkedIn and the Party of Yes effort overall.
If you are a Republican who understands that our success in 2016 and
beyond depends upon our demonstrating our vitality and inclusive nature
as the Party of vibrant but respectful debate, leading to ideas,
programs, and agendas that will benefit this country and all of its
citizens - please join with us in this important new effort. (This is a slightly modified version of a posting at LinkedIn about the noted Conservative journalist and theorist Robert Heiler joining our effort.)
****************************************************** Link to the Party of YES Group at LinkedIn:
Link to the landing page for Bring Back the Meritocracy!, founder Ellen Brandt's project to help the estimated 400 million "Highly-Educated But Under-Employed" in the United States and abroad:
Forget the strident - and downright loony - "Republicans are dying off" propaganda. One of the GOP's major strengths right now is its older and wiser base within the "Gray Population," already more than 2 in 5 U.S. citizens - and almost certainly an absolute Majority of voters in the next 3 or 4 presidential cycles.
Here's the rule of thumb every intelligent GOP activist needs to remember: If the "Mainstream Media" - particularly on the Internet - are overwhelmingly biased towards the Other Party and its interests - which they are - they will try their best to bamboozle us and steer us wrong whenever they can.
And nowhere have the "MSM" camouflaged Reality quite so much recently as in their treatment of changing American Demographics and what they mean for our political life right here, right now.
The "MSM" has been talking up - incessantly - various constituencies which traditionally vote more for Democrats than for Republicans, while talking down constituencies which have traditionally voted GOP.
We'll talk about their highly inaccurate takes on so-called Minority voters in future stories. I use the qualifier "so-called," because every American is now a member of one or more Minorities. The sole Majority is women over men - and that, alas! is caused by women still outliving men by several years.
But the focus of this article is not on ethnicity, religion, or sex. It's on age, a factor which increasingly does divide American voters - with Republicans gaining the clear advantage.
The absolutely worst - and most calculated - distortion about Demographics the vaunted "MSM" have tried to bamboozle politicians and political activists and the general public with is exactly how America's age-based constituencies are evolving - and what that means for the U.S. electorate and its immediate priorities.
More than 2 in 5 American citizens - and about 1 in 2 American voters - are already age 50 or older.
If you didn't realize that, you're not alone. And your being kept in the dark about it has been entirely intentional.
We all saw the screeching headlines - still occurring - about the Millennial generation of very young Americans now "outnumbering" the generation largely made up of their own parents, the Baby Boomers.
That may be true - but it doesn't matter, especially politically.
First, a qualification of the "Millennials Reign" story from the Demographic profession. Demographers have been arguing amongst themselves about where the Millennial generation should begin and end.
Since their parents, the Boomers, are an 18-year generation - those born in 1946 through those born in 1964 - many demographers believe Millennials should also be classified as an 18-year generation, ending in the year of the Millennium, 2000.
So Millennials right now are aged 15-33, although some Demographers place both the top and the bottom a bit lower for some reason, classifying them as currently aged 12 or 13 to 30 or 31.
OK by me. And, as one can see, the youngest Millennials will not be able to vote in 2016, despite the fact that Nancy Pelosi, among other fanatics-for-their-Party, has proposed a new voting age of 15 or 16 - or possibly, age 3. (We understand Toddlers For Hillary is gearing up at preschools around the country.)
We also should stress - briefly, because we'll talk about it in later stories - that the very young have been very poor voters in America for many years. In the last election, only about 1 in 4 of them bothered going to the polls, as opposed to strong turnouts for voters over age 50.
But none of the foregoing is the major point - or the major Bamboozlement that the "Mainstream Media" has tried to pull off.
No, the main point is simply this: Baby Boomers are by no means all voters over 50. How could so many intelligent and aware politicians and political operatives and political commentators somehow failed to understand this for so long?
The Boomers, currently aged 51-69, are still a massively large generation. They are also the best-educated generation in U.S. history - before or since - and are still generally very healthy, physically and otherwise, with the possibility of a full one-third or more of their lives - i.e. 30 or 40 years - still ahead of them.
But there are many healthy, active, intelligent Americans older than Boomers - i.e. age 70 and above. In fact, this age cohort contains quite a number of government leaders - in all three branches - including the majority of the Supreme Court, several Cabinet members, and all sorts of Congressional bright lights. The 70-plus cohort, for example, includes Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and John Kerry, on the Democratic side, and John McCain, Ron Paul, and Mitch McConnell, on the GOP side.
This year, 2015, marked a significant Demographic turning point, as the first of the Gen-Xers, another well-educated and influential generation, started turning 50. And that generation is "front-loaded," meaning there are more Gen-Xers in its vanguard than bringing up the rear.
Counting all American citizens age 50 and older - Baby Boomers in our 50s and 60s; the many Americans aged 70 and older; and the beginning of the Gen-X generation turning 50 - about 43 percent of Americans - or more than 2 in 5 of us - are already members of the "Gray Population."
And that is going to accelerate, not decelerate, over the next decade or two, with Americans 50 and older reaching a possible high close to 50 percent of our citizenry - or 1 in every 2 of us - in another 10-12 years.
Ignore the "Grays" at Your Peril, Politicians!
In voting terms, this aging Demographic is going to be not only important, but, many of us believe, beyond a doubt the most important factor in deciding which Party wins the presidential race in 2016 - and 2020 - and 2024 - and maybe even 2028.
Because despite Congresswoman Pelosi's efforts, it is very unlikely that those under the age of 18 are going to get the vote any time soon.
And, if one leaves out Americans aged 0-17, about 50 percent of those eligible to vote right now, right here, in the upcoming 2016 election - and probably in the next 3 presidential contests after 2016 - will be members of the"Gray Population" aged 50 and older.
I am talking in absolute terms, remember, not in terms of "likely voters."
If you factor in the voting percentages of young voters versus voters over 50 - especially since those currently over 50 now include all Baby Boomers, an historically politically aware and politically active group - who goes to the polls and who does not in this election and the next several elections after this is going to skew in a fairly astounding fashion towards the "Gray Bloc" of voters.
So far, as we all know, voters over 50 have been favoring the GOP.
But keep in mind that our "Gray Population," as currently constituted - particularly we Boomers in our 50s and 60s - tends to be well-educated; opinionated; and in many cases, greatly disenchanted with the political status quo.
Above all, we are not content to be taken for granted.
Most of us understand, even if some politicians and media people do not - yet! - that it is we "Grays," not any other constituency the Bamboozlers are trying to thrust forward as swing votes, who will likely determine the outcome of both the primaries and the Big Race in 2016.
The GOP may have us right now. But the Party needs to hold on to us against what are certain to be strong attempts to herd us into the Other Party's fold.
We will talk much more about what key issues the "Gray Population" cares about - and how to adjust our Party's stances to deal with these issues - in future articles.
But before we do that, simply allow the overriding Demographic Reality to percolate throughout the GOP and become a front-burner focus for every one of us.
***** Over 2 in 5 American citizens are already age 50 and older.
***** About 1 in 2 American voters will be age 50 and older in 2016.
***** People age 50 and older tend to vote in high percentages.
***** People age 50 and older are intelligent. They are aware. And they are issues-oriented.
Start favoring and wooing your Gray Base, GOP! They're the Party's hidden ace in the hole. Don't forfeit a major asset based on misinformation or Media-fostered bias.
****************************************************** Link to the Party of YES Group at LinkedIn:
Americans are all - every one of us - on the same "Dream Team." And we need to support every American Dreamer.
If we are to reestablish the GOP's historical stance as the Party of YES, we need to sweep away the various misconceptions about the American Dream that have arisen over the past few turbulent decades and to restate and reinstate the core principles that should unite us all.
We need to understand once more why this nation was founded and why it became a "Guiding Light" to other nations around the world. If we are no longer that "Guiding Light," we need to figure out what has recently gone wrong and how we can correct our missteps - even, perhaps, some misdeeds - and return to the inclusive and humane and moral path from which we have strayed.
Here, then, is my take on what the American Dream encompasses - and what it does not:
***** The American Dream Is Not the dream of a mythic realm where All the Streets Are Paved With Gold.
The American Dream Is
the universal goal of freedom from hunger and plague and desperate
want. It's the promise and the assurance that our Democratic system will
serve as a shelter against the ravages of extreme poverty for any of
our citizens - and for all of them.
***** The American Dream Is Not your favored group of citizens - or mine or his or hers or theirs - gaining supremacy over all other groups of citizens.
The American Dream Is
all groups and all constituencies - based on age or sex or ethnicity or
religion or any other possible basis of division - finding collective
ways to coexist happily, with respect and tolerance and kindness towards
one another.
***** The American Dream Has Never Been garnering wealth or power or fame, so that you and yours can lord it over your fellow Americans.
The American Dream Is putting
everybody's Meritocratic assets - their intelligence and talent and
education and experience - to universal use, benefiting both you and
yours and everybody else in the Nation.
***** The American Dream Is Not greedily amassing assets to provide for 20 generations of your blood descendants.
The American Dream Is
striving for a productive and secure life for you and your immediate
family, while working to extend the same opportunities and security for
your fellow Americans, your de facto sisters and brothers and sons and
daughters in our extended National family.
***** The American Dream Is Not
hoarding media power, so that those who shout the loudest - or control
the most outlets of propaganda - will be heard clearly and nearly
incessantly, while the vast majority of American citizens become
voiceless and, by extension, hopeless.
Open, free, and easy-access media, in all their permutations, Are a requisite of The American Dream, part and parcel of a government by and for the People.
***** The American Dream Does Not
revolve around promoting your pet causes - whatever they are and
however worthy you believe them to be - as the only ones that matter.
Concentrating
on a narrow or too-partisan agenda tends to create rancor, while
splintering the citizenry into groups working apart, instead of
attempting to come together and reach consensus for the good of all,
which Is the crux of The American Dream.
***** The American Dream Is Not looking
at Life - or our Nation - as a game, computerized or otherwise, in
which one "plays" to win the most points - or power - or dollars - one
can, while everyone else is viewed as a competitor or an outright enemy,
who needs to be vanquished, punished, and eventually obliterated.
America Is a venture - and an adventure - in which we are all on the same Dream Team.
That which benefits Any of us should also benefit All of us. And the
same rules which are allowed to apply to Any of us should likewise apply
to All.
***** Similarly, The American Dream Is Not and Has Never Been a struggle for "survival of the fittest."
As Humans - and specifically, as Humans in America
- we should strive to overcome the "law of the jungle" and our "animal
nature." Democracy - and Democracies - evolved to minimize the civic
ill-effects of Rule by an Elite, on the one hand, and Rule by an
(anarchic) Crowd, on the other.
***** By extension, no one who believes in The American Dream,
should strive to please and cajole and finagle their way into a
powerful Elite, which we hope and pray will somehow "take care of us." The American Dream Is Not a dream of cringing servitude.
In contrast, The American Dream Is
the dream of individualism and self-worth and self-reliance, which no
powerful and pervasive Elite should ever be permitted to take away from
you or me or any other American citizen.
***** Perhaps most important of all, The American Dream Forbids looking at any of one's fellow Americans as "The Other" - the strange, the unwanted, the discarded, the Them who are not Us.
We should be vigilant to stress that All Americans are US, as we are All U.S.
***************************************************** Link to the Party of YES Group at LinkedIn:
Link to the landing page for Bring Back the Meritocracy!, founder Ellen Brandt's project to help the estimated 400 million "Highly-Educated But Under-Employed" in the United States and abroad:
As our previous story on the Great Bimbo Controversy demonstrates (Proud to Be an American Bimbo), you can turn nearly any negative attack, especially an outrageous one, into a positive boost for the individual who's being attacked, if you treat it with humor and wit.
Humor works better in some situations than others, of course. And effective satire is not always possible.
But in our concerted effort to turn the national perception of the GOP from the "Party of NO" back to the "Party of YES," humor needs to become a more frequent part of our political repertoire, as do other kinds of positive rhetoric.
Here, a brief primer on what we need to do to combat the "MSM" (Mainstream Media) and its bias towards the Other Party:
***** Treat other Republicans - ALL other Republicans - with kindness, humanity, decency, and respect.
GOP adherents tend to be moral and ethical people, believers in the Golden Rule of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
Why, then, can't we always remember that this also applies to political discussion and debate?
By all means, pronounce your opinions and points of view in a memorable and forceful manner. But don't do it at the expense of your GOP brethren and sistren. They are presumably working for the betterment, not only of the Party itself, but for the good of the country and the world-at-large.
***** Focus on issues, not personalities.
If you positively hate what Candidate X, Activist Y, or Internet Poster Z (Yes, he is annoying) advocates, aim your critique at the concept or its content, not at the person expounding it.
If your analysis shows your Opponent's tax plan is skewed to favor Vegans or Las Vegans or possibly Vulcans, give us the facts and state why you dislike the plan. But don't attack the plan's creator as a Food Fetishist, Casino Groupie, or the Reincarnation of Mr. Spock.
***** To be seen as inclusive, BE inclusive.
"Political correctness" is a concept that should never have gained favor. Let's assign it to the scrapheap of political discourse.
A Party which courts the favor of only a narrow swath of the electorate will receive the votes of only that narrow swath of the electorate. "Orthodoxy" is a word that should be associated with religious doctrine, not with political life. And "litmus tests" belong in chemistry labs.
Traditionally, the GOP, not the Other Party, has been the historical province of the accepting Big Tent, which welcomes a base of voters as expansive and diverse as America itself.
Let's bring back that Big Tent, right here, right now.
***** No matter the issue or viewpoint, stress its positive aspects, not its negative ones.
Acting like Pollyanna or promising the proverbial chicken, lobster, or tofu in every pot may not be a tactic most Republicans care to embrace. But coming across like Ebenezer Scrooge on a bad hair day with his bunions acting up isn't the best strategy, either.
If you are proposing some new policy or plan that will hurt a significant group of American voters, you can't just say, "This is a hard choice we have to make - tough noogies - take it or leave it." (OK, then, Fella, we'll leave it.)
You need to embrace not only the parameters of the plan you are proposing, but also to embrace figuratively, as fellow Americans and fellow humans, those who will be affected by your plan.
What are the potential positives for them? What can you suggest or propose, so that they will gain in some ways, even if they lose in others?
Not only is emphasizing the positive good practice from a political viewpoint, it's also important for your general reputation as a candidate or activist or someone who seeks to influence the political dialogue.
If your "goals" consist of tearing down to tear down, slashing and burning to slash and burn, harming others because you like to harm them . . . Well, you might want to find another pursuit besides politics - and maybe a good psychologist.
***** Use positive headlines in your print and Internet presentations.
Some on the political stage seem to think only the nastiest and snarkiest content will be picked up by the Mainstream Media and make it into their sound bite machine.
But even if some irresponsible media outlets and reporters do glom onto curse words, gibes, and malicious criticism . . . . Well, let's be better than they are. Let's try to attract them responsibly with positive content and positive headlines, which stress substantive ideas and viewpoints.
That doesn't mean our content or our headlines can't be catchy, however. As we noted above, utilize humor and wit whenever you can. And feel free to use buzzwords which tend to capture audience interest.
"Billingsley Tackles Our Borders" will probably draw more readers than "Billingsley Presents Immigration Plan."
And "Jones Will Create 15 Million Jobs for Americans Over 50" would be picked up by most sites in and out of the "MSM" - without a single nasty word or gibe at a rival candidate.
***** Embrace the vibrant tumult of ideas and opinions.
While avoiding negativity, we should also stress that it's the give-and-take of politics from which all true change emerges.
We need to return to a political atmosphere of forceful discussion and debate, which is exciting, vibrant, and intellectually challenging, without crossing the line into rancor, pettiness, or incivility.
Every good discussion or debate - no matter the issue or policy at hand - has at its core the realization - the anticipation - that there lurks somewhere a viable solution to the issue or problem, a way to reach a satisfactory conclusion and consensus via compromise, bridge-building, and old-fashioned political "horse-trading."
And every active participant in a discussion or debate must be willing to work towards that conclusion and that satisfying consensus.
Anyone not willing to do so is simply not behaving as a politician should, but is rather exhibiting the behavior of an autocrat and a dictator. That is not only non-political behavior. It is anti-political behavior.
***** "Gamification" has no place in politics. And "Winner-Take-All" generally means "Everybody Loses."
Quite a few Americans - in fact, probably the majority of us - have now become thoroughly disillusioned and disgusted with the incessant application of "Game Theory" - and its accompanying algorithms and artificial intelligence - to pretty much every aspect of modern life, from stock markets to marketing to banking to media.
But the main place we'd like to get rid of it once and for all is in our politics. "Winning through intimidation" is not attractive to most of us anymore. Nor is emotional manipulation or outright bullying in any way, shape, or form.
And since "hard-sell" propaganda virtually never works, when you're trying to sell products or services to our generally skeptical and intelligent American population, why should you think it works any better, when what you are selling is a political plan or position?
Moreover, in this age of "SEO" (search engine optimization) and other artificial tools from the world of marketing, most frequent Internet users, at least, understand that information on "What's Trending" or "What's Liked" or "What's Hot" can be largely manipulated and wildly inaccurate.
Even worse, at a time when most respected academic researchers believe more than 2 in 3 "participants" on the Internet today are Script Bots, not human beings - and when humongous 10-million-plus Botnets can be purchased quite easily by the highest bidders and instructed to do their bidding - many of us have great difficulty accepting any focus group or poll or discussion thread which is primarily Internet-based.
Sooner or later, you may say, the cheaters and liars and gamers of the system will be found out and ousted from the political arena.
Maybe. Or maybe not.
But it is high time for all honest and respectable politicians, political activists, and political commentators to start taking a strong stand against the "Gamification" of American political life.
Let's bite the bullet and do it right now, before it becomes too late to do it.
by Dr. Ellen Brandt Like most American women, I'd never realized the term "Bimbo" had somehow morphed into an Honorific. Clearly, though, the term must now be a noble and flattering one. And we all thank Candidate/Etymologist Donald Trump for letting us know we're behind the times on our language's evolution. Because if Fox News anchor and debate moderator Megyn Kelly is the epitome of a "Bimbo," the title is one to which all American women should aspire: *** Kelly comes from a modest background - her Dad, who died young, was a college teacher, her Mom, a homemaker - but she has risen to the very top of her profession as a journalist. "Bimbo," therefore, must describe a self-made woman, without the prop of inherited wealth and its trappings. Surely, that is an admirable thing to be. *** Megyn Kelly graduated from an excellent university - Syracuse - and America's oldest independent law school, Albany Law. So "Bimbo" must apply to educated women - or perhaps especially to well-educated women lawyers. *** After practicing law for a number of years and writing for prestigious journals, Kelly was recruited as a legal analyst by an ABC affiliate television station, covering, among other topics, the U.S. Supreme Court - also her initial specialty at Fox. That clinches it! A "Bimbo" is not only generally well-educated, she also should have a sophisticated field of specialization, which allows her to explain complicated subjects to a wide general audience. If that's the case, we should urge our friends, sisters, daughters and other young women to embrace the new "Bimbo" ethic. *** And speaking of children, Megyn Kelly has three, the youngest a 2-year-old. During a brief maternity leave in 2013, when many non-"Bimbos" might be coddling themselves and their bodies, Kelly spent her time rigorously preparing for a new role at Fox, as sole host of a prime time news show, the Kelly File, which quickly became one of the network's most popular offerings. Yes, we all get it now, Etymologist Trump! "Bimbos" are hard-working, high-achieving, intellectually-accomplished American women, whose lives are examples to all around them. Thanks so much for clearing it up for us. By this new definition, the ranks of Republican women - and Democratic women - and Independent women - are utterly crowded with "Bimbos" of all ages, from all backgrounds, with all sorts of interests, and in all kinds of jobs. All I can say is, "American Bimbos Forever!"
