I guess in crude, reductionist terms, Republican politicians are accountants or actuarial scientists, while Democrats are thespians, standup comedians and poets.
It's common knowledge that Democrats are far more likely to be ruled by emotionalism, idealism and imagery than are Republicans. And while there is no shortage of Republicans and conservatives who do harbor idealistic hopes and dreams; who do feel emotion and passion; their M.O. is generally to appeal to rationalism, common sense and logic.
I confess: When I was a young man, many years ago, I succumbed to some of the leftist precepts. I naively supported gun control in part because I didn't have a grasp of history, failed to contemplate the foibles of human nature, and underestimated the solid common sense of firearms ownership. There are other examples of simple-minded, superficial thinking in which I engaged. I remember one time using a lame line against my father in an argument regarding abortion: "You can't legislate morality." It wasn't so much that I was gung-ho about abortion; it was that I wanted to contradict and lock horns with my dad.
The problem with millions of liberals is that, despite their age -- whether they're 25, 40 or 60 or 75 -- they haven't outgrown the naive pipe dreams of youth. History, the harsh laws of economics and the brutal truth about human nature are, to use a favorite liberal term, "inconvenient truths."
But the benefit to Democrat politicians is that tens of millions of young people don't read (other than tweets and brief Facebook posts), and have been dumbed down by our abysmal K-12 schools and doctrinaire universities. They're incapable of critical thinking, ignorant of history, unaware of the significance of the U.S. constitution and how it undergirds our society, and clueless about how basic economic and fiscal laws fly in the face of many Democrat policies. Moreover, they have not been taught of the evils and atrocities of socialism and communism.
Oh, but one thing these young people adore is razzle-dazzle. They love the silver-tongue politicians, the endorsements by rap stars and Hollywood actors, the so-called "progressive" messaging baked into movies and TV programs, the snarky leftist drivel from late night talk show hosts, and the punchy, pithy one liners of Twitter. In other words, they're not what you'd call studious, sober students of history or civic-minded citizens. Democrats are experts at staging and theatrics, so this audience is ready-made for them and their tendencies.
Those who favor the Democrats are suckers for the emotional, sensationalist coverage in which CNN and MSNBC specialize. When the networks make a big deal out of children being separated from their adult guardians at the American border, this strikes a nerve with the easily swayed youth. But when Republicans try to explain how President Trump's tax cuts and regulatory reform have stimulated investment and boosted the economy, they might as well be talking nuclear physics. It just doesn't register.
Therein lies the daunting challenge for conservatives when they try to make the case for keeping the U.S. House in the hands of Republicans. To the emotional and idealistic voters, the threat of a Democrat-dominated House -- nonstop impeachment hearings, document subpoenas, harassment of administration officials, and efforts to roll back Trump policies -- is no big deal. Matter of fact, many of them dislike Trump and would vote for anyone who promises to oppose the president.
But appeal to the young and liberal with razzle-dazzle? I don't think we can expect conservative politicians, consultants or media advisors to come through. Time to search for better communicators. Dry stats, bar graphs and anecdotes from the heartland just ain't gonna cut it.
Comments