I’ve wondered for years why Democrats, both on the State and National levels, can’t get it together to deliver messaging that’s as effective in promoting themselves and their cause as what the Republicans seems to push. It’s infuriating.
Republicans are much more effective at settling on a message, then distributing it to everyone so they're echoing the same comments across the entire country. They amplify each other.
Three more excellent examples of the problem in this morning’s Register. Stories on pages A3, A4 and A5 quote Grassley, Ernst, Reynolds, Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy as questioning the fairness of prosecuting Trump. Not one Democrat quoted anywhere. Political coverage in Iowa over the coming months is going to naturally lean Republican anyway because of the flood of GOP presidential candidates. That makes it even more imperative that Iowa Democrats address this issue.
So on target! We’ve been gnashing our teeth at the quotes coming from Reynolds and Grassley! Do past candidates or office holders have standing? Who in iowa will be 2024 candidates? And will Chair Hart be best served with an Iowa focus instead of a national focus when we have so much rebuilding to do here? Thanks for your challenge to the media.
There are some outstanding freshman Democrats in the Iowa House who would be great at this. Sean Bagniewski, Megan Srinivas and Austin Baeth come to mind. They're good on camera, smart, and strong communicators. Maybe a team approach would work.
Dave, the Democrats do need to improve their media strategy, but assuming they do, the vast majority of Iowan's don't trust the DC establishment, so a new media strategy most likely won't change that. If you don't believe their is a two-tiered federal justice system, how can you defend them looking the other way with regard to Ms. Clinton (Bleaching hard drives and destroying cell phones that were under subpoena, let alone the fiasco with Hunter BIden? Mr. Trump made his own bed but the fairness of all of this is in question.
Jim, I don't condone Clinton have the emails at home, but there are important differences. First, she was the sitting Secretary of State, so they were part of doing her job. Second, she cooperated. Her attorneys went through the emails and returned 30,000 out of an abundance of caution. Of those, only a relative few were top secret. The rest were personal and not relevant to any government work, so the lawyers deleted them to remove the server. Conspiracy theorists will always speculate what was in the deleted emails but conspiracy theorists will always seize on something.
Final point - Trump was only indicted for the documents he refused to return after the government patiently worked with him and asked repeatedly they be given back. Not one indictment is tied to any document Trump returned, even though it took nearly a year to do so. He then obstructed the investigation, hid documents and refused to cooperate. He's indicted only for those he refused to return. He violated every campaign promise he made about taking good care of sensitive documents.
I do appreciate Jim Kersten's willingness to comment; and Dave's thoughtful response --I hope Mr. Kersten will accept Dave's efforts at dialogue and continue to compare and contrast these different situations.
Absolutley I will be happy to have respectful dialogue, it is what our country needs today! The last summer President Obama was in office, I was in Washington, DC for meetings. After dinner around 9pm I got back to my hotel and ran into a friend who was sitting in the lobby bar with someone I did not recognize . He asked me to join them and I did. The other person ended up being then South Dakota Mike Rounds, now US Senator Rounds. A few minutes later, retired Senator Alan Simpson entered the same way I did. He new Governor Rounds so he came over and joined us. After covering many different topics, I asked Senator Simpson "How can we get our Country Back on track again?". Without batting an eye, he said "The MF'rs aren't talking to each other. He said Obama is not talking to Senate Leader Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi or Boehner, and none of the legislative leaders are talking with themselves"....he then went on and said "Back when I was a leader in the Senate, Tip O'Neil was Speaker, and Reagan was President, we faught like cats and dogs during the day, but I would walk across the Rotunda and sit on Tip's balconey, find agreement and then drive to the WH and get a deal with President Reagan...our leaders need to start talking again while agreeing to disagree but find compromise".
Ralph, many of your fellow Democrats (Mike Gronstal, Tony B, George Kinley, Joe Welsh, Berle Priebe, Jack Kibbie to name a few) were a guy's I may have disagreed with while serving in the Iowa Senate, but you were always respectful and actually did try to work in a bi-partisan manner when possible.
Thank you for that.
I do appreciate Dave's thoughtful response but stilll see why millions of American's see a dual justice system.
I have been having discsussions with Ed Goeas who co-authored the book
"A Question of RESPECT: Bringing Us Together in a Deeply Divided Nation". I have invited him to Iowa to possiblly appear on various news shows and Iowa Press (They don't know this yet!). His message might help Iowan's cut through the clutter as the Presidential Process heats up.
I would love to set up a private lunch with those interested in visiting with him and his book. (If he is interested!)
If you have not read the book you can find it on Amazon.
Thanks and I will keep the communication flowing and an open mind! I don't do a lot of chatting online but am happy to in person.
Thank you for writing this. And you can bet if only Dems were in power they would be going out of their way to find Republican commentary for "balance."
PS: although Dems in the Iowa legislature are few and far between, I’m suggesting that all of us SHARE Dave’s column, and act on it if you can …. We simply have to get our VOICES heard and recruit and support new leaders at all levels!
Chris - Co-chair Greene County, and founding member of PRO Iowa 24 Committee
Holy cow! This is so eye-opening. And I, too, am tired of reporting that simply strips social media quotes. Which is why we need to support voices who dig deeper. Like you!
Dave, you are correct to note this, but it should be so apparent to the media that it’s unnecessary to mention it. Of course, there are many Iowa Democrats the media could contact for an opposing perspective. Not only any possible Democratic candidates for the Congressional seats next year but any previous Democratic gubernatorial, senatorial or congressional candidates.
Dave, you are even-handed in your critique of the media and the Democrats messaging. The D messaging has been missing in action for a number of campaign cycles. The D leadership hold the loudest megaphones. The latter have collected dust with unwritten columns and letters to the editor and absence from social media rebuttal of R policy.
Yes, the impression left with readers and viewers is that every Iowan thinks not only that the debt ceiling agreement was Biden’s fault and that Trump is getting a raw deal, but that every Iowan agrees with every policy promoted by R leadership. There are Iowans who do not agree and are starving for voices.
You are spot on Dave Busiek and there are plenty of PR pros in D leadership. But too often the real news media get hammered for any coverage of the libs so it seems just no win for anyone except the extreme right.
Carlyn, news managers need to be responsive to criticism of their coverage, but that doesn't mean dialing back assertive coverage of either side. I've said before - good journalism isn't a popularity contest. If we're doing our jobs well, we will on occasion take some heat.
The two forces behind America's growing political divide
If it’s FRIDAY… President Biden travels to Hartford, Conn., to mark the one-year anniversary of the bipartisan gun-control legislation he signed into law… Biden allies question Democrats’ silence about Donald Trump’s recent indictment… Francis Suarez touts his record in speech after launching presidential bid… Ron DeSantis heads to Nevada to headline Saturday’s annual Basque Fry fundraiser… And “Meet the Press Now” interviews Asa Hutchinson.
But FIRST... Two key forces are driving America's growing political divide, according to historical data from our NBC News (formerly NBC News/Wall Street Journal) poll.
One force is the demographic change in the Republican Party over the last 10 years, where whites without college degrees now make up a clear majority of today's GOP.
In 2012, our poll found 48% of self-described Republicans were whites without college degrees, and another 40% who were whites with college degrees.
Ten years later, however, non-college whites now make up 62% of all Republicans, while the share of whites with college degrees has declined to 25%.
That transformation has produced changes in the GOP's values and policy preferences.
Take the issue of free trade. In 2015 – before Trump became president – a nearly equal share of Democrats (56%) and Republicans (48%) said free trade with foreign countries is good for America. Yet by 2019, the gap here between Democrats (73%) and Republicans (52%) had grown to 21 points.
There's also gun control. In 1995, 48% of Republicans agreed with a statement expressing frustration that the government will not do enough to regulate access to firearms.
Now? The portion of Republicans who agree with this statement is 22%.
The second big change our poll over the last 10 years has been a Democratic Party that's become much more liberal.
In 2012's merged NBC News polling, 43% of Democrats described themselves as liberal, with 19% calling themselves "very liberal."
Ten years later, 55% of Democrats said they were liberal, with 29% being "very liberal."
That's produced changes in values and policy preferences, too
In 2013's polling, only 10% of Democrats said they didn't follow a religion. Ten years later, that's grown to 38%.
On policy, meanwhile, 45% of Democrats said the government should do more to solve problems, according to the Dec. 1995 NBC/WSJ poll, versus 17% of Republicans who said the same.
Yet by April 2021, Republicans had pretty much stayed the same on this question (23% wanting the government to do more), while the Democratic percentage had grown to 82%.
For more on these changes, check out the Meet the Press Blog.
And for even more, see this presentation from the pollsters who conduct the NBC News poll. It's a fascinating read.
Thank you for pointing this out, Dave. It's a huge problem. At one point the polls showed that one third of Iowans were Republican, one third were Democrats, and one third were Independents. Unfortunately, when you look at who votes every election, things get skewed. There are too many people who stay home while the older folks never miss. I wish our elected officials were more cognizant that they serve all Iowans and not turn every opportunity into a political attack. However, we must register, educate, and urge every citizen to vote! That's what I'm trying to do, as the President of the League of Women Voters of Black Hawk-Bremer Counties. Democracy flourishes when we respect everyone's opinions.
Wow! The media, at least the local media, are pro-conservative, pro-GOP, irresponsibly-biased against the D's. First I have heard this--who knew!?
The right has screamed for years about the "liberal press", mixing "opinion" into "news" and leaving no voice for the conservatives' side. Has it really swung the other way? Or is it just whose ox is currently . . . . . . .
Our current D-distress is self-inflicted--massive political incompetence, promoting fiscal policies and cultural concepts that are dead-on-arrival on a statewide basis leading to a GOP sweep (Reynolds' coat tails almost infinite) and enabling the current legislative excess.
We gotta' get real. Take a page from W.F. Buckley and ". . . .nominate the most [conservative] LIBERAL candidates that have a chance of winning", with "winning" trumping "liberal", and delete or submerge policies and concepts that guarantee failure. This is Iowa, not NY or CA.
Only divided government forces compromise on significant issues and flushes the fluff from both sides. Let's get there.
I agree wholeheartedly with your essay, Dave. Last election, though I knew the name of the Dem who ran against Feenstra, I never saw one commercial, one email, even one appearance by him. Meanwhile, Feenstra was everywhere. I don't even know what Dems are running this cycle! They need to get out there and start campaigning, raising money, being visible. Then maybe the press will follow.
I’ve wondered for years why Democrats, both on the State and National levels, can’t get it together to deliver messaging that’s as effective in promoting themselves and their cause as what the Republicans seems to push. It’s infuriating.
Republicans are much more effective at settling on a message, then distributing it to everyone so they're echoing the same comments across the entire country. They amplify each other.
Three more excellent examples of the problem in this morning’s Register. Stories on pages A3, A4 and A5 quote Grassley, Ernst, Reynolds, Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy as questioning the fairness of prosecuting Trump. Not one Democrat quoted anywhere. Political coverage in Iowa over the coming months is going to naturally lean Republican anyway because of the flood of GOP presidential candidates. That makes it even more imperative that Iowa Democrats address this issue.
So on target! We’ve been gnashing our teeth at the quotes coming from Reynolds and Grassley! Do past candidates or office holders have standing? Who in iowa will be 2024 candidates? And will Chair Hart be best served with an Iowa focus instead of a national focus when we have so much rebuilding to do here? Thanks for your challenge to the media.
There are some outstanding freshman Democrats in the Iowa House who would be great at this. Sean Bagniewski, Megan Srinivas and Austin Baeth come to mind. They're good on camera, smart, and strong communicators. Maybe a team approach would work.
A Coalition!
Hart has released statements on several of the Repub candidates and national issues. Why is the media not reporting them?
Dave, the Democrats do need to improve their media strategy, but assuming they do, the vast majority of Iowan's don't trust the DC establishment, so a new media strategy most likely won't change that. If you don't believe their is a two-tiered federal justice system, how can you defend them looking the other way with regard to Ms. Clinton (Bleaching hard drives and destroying cell phones that were under subpoena, let alone the fiasco with Hunter BIden? Mr. Trump made his own bed but the fairness of all of this is in question.
Jim, I don't condone Clinton have the emails at home, but there are important differences. First, she was the sitting Secretary of State, so they were part of doing her job. Second, she cooperated. Her attorneys went through the emails and returned 30,000 out of an abundance of caution. Of those, only a relative few were top secret. The rest were personal and not relevant to any government work, so the lawyers deleted them to remove the server. Conspiracy theorists will always speculate what was in the deleted emails but conspiracy theorists will always seize on something.
Final point - Trump was only indicted for the documents he refused to return after the government patiently worked with him and asked repeatedly they be given back. Not one indictment is tied to any document Trump returned, even though it took nearly a year to do so. He then obstructed the investigation, hid documents and refused to cooperate. He's indicted only for those he refused to return. He violated every campaign promise he made about taking good care of sensitive documents.
Significant differences, in my view.
I do appreciate Jim Kersten's willingness to comment; and Dave's thoughtful response --I hope Mr. Kersten will accept Dave's efforts at dialogue and continue to compare and contrast these different situations.
Absolutley I will be happy to have respectful dialogue, it is what our country needs today! The last summer President Obama was in office, I was in Washington, DC for meetings. After dinner around 9pm I got back to my hotel and ran into a friend who was sitting in the lobby bar with someone I did not recognize . He asked me to join them and I did. The other person ended up being then South Dakota Mike Rounds, now US Senator Rounds. A few minutes later, retired Senator Alan Simpson entered the same way I did. He new Governor Rounds so he came over and joined us. After covering many different topics, I asked Senator Simpson "How can we get our Country Back on track again?". Without batting an eye, he said "The MF'rs aren't talking to each other. He said Obama is not talking to Senate Leader Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi or Boehner, and none of the legislative leaders are talking with themselves"....he then went on and said "Back when I was a leader in the Senate, Tip O'Neil was Speaker, and Reagan was President, we faught like cats and dogs during the day, but I would walk across the Rotunda and sit on Tip's balconey, find agreement and then drive to the WH and get a deal with President Reagan...our leaders need to start talking again while agreeing to disagree but find compromise".
Ralph, many of your fellow Democrats (Mike Gronstal, Tony B, George Kinley, Joe Welsh, Berle Priebe, Jack Kibbie to name a few) were a guy's I may have disagreed with while serving in the Iowa Senate, but you were always respectful and actually did try to work in a bi-partisan manner when possible.
Thank you for that.
I do appreciate Dave's thoughtful response but stilll see why millions of American's see a dual justice system.
I have been having discsussions with Ed Goeas who co-authored the book
"A Question of RESPECT: Bringing Us Together in a Deeply Divided Nation". I have invited him to Iowa to possiblly appear on various news shows and Iowa Press (They don't know this yet!). His message might help Iowan's cut through the clutter as the Presidential Process heats up.
I would love to set up a private lunch with those interested in visiting with him and his book. (If he is interested!)
If you have not read the book you can find it on Amazon.
Thanks and I will keep the communication flowing and an open mind! I don't do a lot of chatting online but am happy to in person.
Jim Kersten
Thank you for writing this. And you can bet if only Dems were in power they would be going out of their way to find Republican commentary for "balance."
Agree.
PS: although Dems in the Iowa legislature are few and far between, I’m suggesting that all of us SHARE Dave’s column, and act on it if you can …. We simply have to get our VOICES heard and recruit and support new leaders at all levels!
Chris - Co-chair Greene County, and founding member of PRO Iowa 24 Committee
Holy cow! This is so eye-opening. And I, too, am tired of reporting that simply strips social media quotes. Which is why we need to support voices who dig deeper. Like you!
Dave, you are correct to note this, but it should be so apparent to the media that it’s unnecessary to mention it. Of course, there are many Iowa Democrats the media could contact for an opposing perspective. Not only any possible Democratic candidates for the Congressional seats next year but any previous Democratic gubernatorial, senatorial or congressional candidates.
Dave, you are even-handed in your critique of the media and the Democrats messaging. The D messaging has been missing in action for a number of campaign cycles. The D leadership hold the loudest megaphones. The latter have collected dust with unwritten columns and letters to the editor and absence from social media rebuttal of R policy.
Yes, the impression left with readers and viewers is that every Iowan thinks not only that the debt ceiling agreement was Biden’s fault and that Trump is getting a raw deal, but that every Iowan agrees with every policy promoted by R leadership. There are Iowans who do not agree and are starving for voices.
You are spot on Dave Busiek and there are plenty of PR pros in D leadership. But too often the real news media get hammered for any coverage of the libs so it seems just no win for anyone except the extreme right.
Carlyn, news managers need to be responsive to criticism of their coverage, but that doesn't mean dialing back assertive coverage of either side. I've said before - good journalism isn't a popularity contest. If we're doing our jobs well, we will on occasion take some heat.
An interesting situation in Grand Rapids, Michigan, this week. A news manager emailed staff telling them to dial back coverage of Pride Month activities, because it angers conservative viewers. Luckily, the station has apologized. Details here: https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/16/business/nexstar-news-probes-local-pride-coverage/index.html
Another interesting read:
The two forces behind America's growing political divide
If it’s FRIDAY… President Biden travels to Hartford, Conn., to mark the one-year anniversary of the bipartisan gun-control legislation he signed into law… Biden allies question Democrats’ silence about Donald Trump’s recent indictment… Francis Suarez touts his record in speech after launching presidential bid… Ron DeSantis heads to Nevada to headline Saturday’s annual Basque Fry fundraiser… And “Meet the Press Now” interviews Asa Hutchinson.
But FIRST... Two key forces are driving America's growing political divide, according to historical data from our NBC News (formerly NBC News/Wall Street Journal) poll.
One force is the demographic change in the Republican Party over the last 10 years, where whites without college degrees now make up a clear majority of today's GOP.
In 2012, our poll found 48% of self-described Republicans were whites without college degrees, and another 40% who were whites with college degrees.
Ten years later, however, non-college whites now make up 62% of all Republicans, while the share of whites with college degrees has declined to 25%.
That transformation has produced changes in the GOP's values and policy preferences.
Take the issue of free trade. In 2015 – before Trump became president – a nearly equal share of Democrats (56%) and Republicans (48%) said free trade with foreign countries is good for America. Yet by 2019, the gap here between Democrats (73%) and Republicans (52%) had grown to 21 points.
There's also gun control. In 1995, 48% of Republicans agreed with a statement expressing frustration that the government will not do enough to regulate access to firearms.
Now? The portion of Republicans who agree with this statement is 22%.
The second big change our poll over the last 10 years has been a Democratic Party that's become much more liberal.
In 2012's merged NBC News polling, 43% of Democrats described themselves as liberal, with 19% calling themselves "very liberal."
Ten years later, 55% of Democrats said they were liberal, with 29% being "very liberal."
That's produced changes in values and policy preferences, too
In 2013's polling, only 10% of Democrats said they didn't follow a religion. Ten years later, that's grown to 38%.
On policy, meanwhile, 45% of Democrats said the government should do more to solve problems, according to the Dec. 1995 NBC/WSJ poll, versus 17% of Republicans who said the same.
Yet by April 2021, Republicans had pretty much stayed the same on this question (23% wanting the government to do more), while the Democratic percentage had grown to 82%.
For more on these changes, check out the Meet the Press Blog.
And for even more, see this presentation from the pollsters who conduct the NBC News poll. It's a fascinating read.
Thank you for pointing this out, Dave. It's a huge problem. At one point the polls showed that one third of Iowans were Republican, one third were Democrats, and one third were Independents. Unfortunately, when you look at who votes every election, things get skewed. There are too many people who stay home while the older folks never miss. I wish our elected officials were more cognizant that they serve all Iowans and not turn every opportunity into a political attack. However, we must register, educate, and urge every citizen to vote! That's what I'm trying to do, as the President of the League of Women Voters of Black Hawk-Bremer Counties. Democracy flourishes when we respect everyone's opinions.
Wow! The media, at least the local media, are pro-conservative, pro-GOP, irresponsibly-biased against the D's. First I have heard this--who knew!?
The right has screamed for years about the "liberal press", mixing "opinion" into "news" and leaving no voice for the conservatives' side. Has it really swung the other way? Or is it just whose ox is currently . . . . . . .
Our current D-distress is self-inflicted--massive political incompetence, promoting fiscal policies and cultural concepts that are dead-on-arrival on a statewide basis leading to a GOP sweep (Reynolds' coat tails almost infinite) and enabling the current legislative excess.
We gotta' get real. Take a page from W.F. Buckley and ". . . .nominate the most [conservative] LIBERAL candidates that have a chance of winning", with "winning" trumping "liberal", and delete or submerge policies and concepts that guarantee failure. This is Iowa, not NY or CA.
Only divided government forces compromise on significant issues and flushes the fluff from both sides. Let's get there.
I agree wholeheartedly with your essay, Dave. Last election, though I knew the name of the Dem who ran against Feenstra, I never saw one commercial, one email, even one appearance by him. Meanwhile, Feenstra was everywhere. I don't even know what Dems are running this cycle! They need to get out there and start campaigning, raising money, being visible. Then maybe the press will follow.