In an Associated Press-NORC poll last month, 77 percent of Americans overall and 69 percent of Democrats said Biden is “too old to effectively serve” a second term. Indeed, I had noted this in a previous post,
and then queried how the hell this could be, after quoting Financial Times columnist Jemima Kelly who wrote (Sept. 3rd):
"Trump may be guilty of sexual abuse of women, lying, cheating and insurrection but he "also has all sorts of redeeming features: charisma, charm, relatability, huge stamina and the ability to be very funny, among other things."
Basically conceding Trump's feral, bombastic and aggressive nature is what has earned him polling advantage among too many American voters, especially in the age category. But still it doesn't fully account for why so many are so 'lost at sea' when Biden has performed far beyond any realistic expectations of what any president could have done the past 3 years - faced with the same problems. Some of the reasons for this were explored in a post a month later, when I lambasted comedian Bill Maher's nonsense calling for Biden to pack it in:
But now, in a recent contribution to Substack, former Obama Treasury Secretary Robert Reich (see link at very end of post) has nailed what I am convinced is the most plausible explanation for why so many are turned off Joe Biden despite his many accomplishments (including one of the most superb speeches to the American public, pleading for the support of the "indispensable nation" last week). Reich in his blog post wrote:
"This raises a third theory: Biden doesn’t
communicate in ways that today’s media and much of the public are able to hear.
I
think there’s a lot to this.
I’m
old enough to remember when President Dwight D. Eisenhower talked to the
nation. Despite Ike’s flat delivery, which was often punctuated with
throat-clearing, the public listened and responded, usually positively, because
Americans in the 1950s were able to process non-emotive messages. They might
disagree with him, but he gave reasons for what he did or proposed and invited
voters to deliberate rationally.
The
media of that era felt duty-bound to transmit those non-emotive messages.
By
“non-emotive,” I mean messages that are straightforward. They don’t cause the
recipient to be entertained or inspired, don’t play on fear or bigotry or any
other strong negative emotion.
This
is no longer the way the media transmits information or how Americans process
it. Now, a message has to pack a wallop to be heard.
Everything Trump says and posts is designed to spur an emotional
reaction. His anger, ridicule, and vindictiveness are intended to elicit
immediate, passionate responses.
Trump
gets attention because the media lives off emotive messaging. The more charged
the message, the more likely viewers will stop scrolling. The fiercer the
words, the more likely readers will take notice.
Joe Biden still lives in the world of rational, non-emotive
messaging. He has been in politics for 50 years. He is steeped in rational,
conventional argument — the kind Dwight Eisenhower delivered.
When
it comes to “messaging” about his accomplishments, neither Biden nor his
surrogates do the emotive work that our media ecosystem demands and the
American public is now primed to respond to.
When voters tell pollsters they think Trump is “stronger” than
Biden on foreign policy or the economy, the “strength” they feel comes from the
emotions Trump stirs up — rage, ferocity, vindictiveness, and anger. These
emotions are connected to brute strength.
Biden
projects strength the old-fashioned way — through mature and responsible
leadership. But mature and responsible leadership doesn’t break through today’s
media and reach today’s public nearly as well as brute strength."
Which sums up the media disparity between what we behold now and what was accepted 60 plus years ago. In 2 words: "Non-emotive messaging". People watching the 1960 Kennedy -Nixon debates, for example, as I did, expected no histrionics from the participants - like we beheld from Trump in a 2020 debate, e.g.
Trump The Racist Thug Proves He's Unfit To Debate - Or To Lead This Nation
By contrast, the Kennedy-Nixon debates were almost sedate, but viewers were glued in to the content not the emotions. Readers who wish to see a sample of the first 1960 JFK-Nixon debate can do so here:
The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate of 1960 - YouTube
Thus, two different media worlds, one (today) which panders to bombast and emotion, the other which elevated reason and discourse. No pacing around, like Trump displayed in his debate with Hillary in 2016, nor any attacks directed at the moderator.
I explored some of the similar aspects to what Reich covered in a February, 2021 post:
Noting:
"the propaganda strategies used, like rallies, have stayed remarkably the same, even as information mediums have changed. Mussolini used newsreels, Hitler used radio, and Trump had used Twitter, with his misspelled words and grade-school vocabulary playing into his “everyman” persona.
Over a century, a central paradoxical truth seems to hold: The more skilled the leader is at mediacentric politics, the more his admirers see him as authentic, as real. This also opens the door to swallowing his lies especially if repeated often enough."
All confirmed by Mr. Reich in his post, especially in gravitating to entertainment news that spiels propaganda (i.e. FOX), as well as too many having already been radicalized by Trimpkin hate, e.g.
Republican radicalization takes its toll
See Also:
by Robert Reich | October 24, 2023 - 7:17am | permalink
And:
by Rebecca Gordon | October 26, 2023 - 6:39am | permalink
Sometimes the right wing in this country seems like a riddle wrapped in an enigma encased in a conundrum.
Do they want to strengthen the government in line with the once-fringe doctrine of the “unitary executive,” concentrating most official power in the hands of a president who would then rule more or less by fiat? That’s the fascist position.
Or would they prefer to destroy the government, to “starve the beast,” something anti-tax activist Grover Norquist used to call for decades ago
And:
by Robert Becker | October 29, 2023 - 6:28am | permalink
Would a taped murder on Fifth Avenue shred cult loyalty by Christian nationalists, abortion-crusaders, gun fanatics, or anti-government extremists?
And:
And:
by Bruce T. Boccardy | October 29, 2023 - 5:48am | permalink
Excerpt:
Media Angst
Some of the media are preoccupied with a baffling question; Why are Americans not celebrating the economic accomplishments of the Biden administration?
A poll from the Suffolk University Sawyer Business School and USA TODAY released this September reported that 70 percent of Americans believe the economy is worsening; 84 percent said their cost of living was rising.
The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Research reported this August that 36 percent of adults approved of the Biden administration’s direction of the economy.
A CNN poll this July reported that 58 percent think that his policies have exacerbated the economic conditions in the U.S. This is an increase of 8 points since last fall.
Highly regarded progressive author and radio talk show host Thom Hartmann asserted that the problem for the Biden administration is the fault of the corporate media to report those economic accomplishments.
The accomplishments are well, just not enough.
Many Americans do not recognize them for valid reasons.
It has been suggested that it is the result of a mass “menticide,” a scientific term from Latin meaning “a killing of the mind.” Webster’s defines it as “a systemic and intentional undermining of a person’s conscious mind.” Perhaps Americans are susceptible to the pathological normalization of lies spread by Mr. Trump and his collaborators.
No comments:
Post a Comment