« Bush's '06 strategy: Bash the press? | Main | Tomasky's nasty "simian" rhetoric »

June 27, 2006


I would think it would be hard to pin a Democratic politician with language from a multi-person blog like Daily Kos, as there is no single authorial or editorial voice to either claim or decry. I'm not sure why someone can't say something like:

"It's a bit like the Wild, Wild West in there. I don't agree with everything that said there, but I've found some valuable viewpoints in the community."

And then adduce examples of good, milquetoast blog opinions. That would seem to buy the politician credit with the blogging community by acknowledging the value of the community, and at the same time allow him to define himself as distinct and more moderate than that community. Win-win, no?

Moreover, Republicans would seem to have faced and solved a similar problem as regards state party platforms. As I recall, the Texas Republican Party platform is pretty frightening, and the scary language has been reported in the media. Yet few people hold that language against the Republicans, or even Texas Republicans.

In my opinion the "success" of liberal blogs to attract media attention seems to be largely a function of the lack of leadership from the Democratic Party. After all conservative blogs like RedState and LittleGreenFootballs have existed for just about as long. The Republicans have been successful in making news whereas the Democrats have not.

When the most newsworthy message your party has is coming from the Internet you have a big problem.

"The model that underlies this argument is spatial voting, which portrays voters as choosing the candidate who is closest to them ideologically."

It sounds to me that you are filtering your opinions through the same model. Your labeling of Kos as extremist is vague; certainly the contractor comment was made years ago. Many of the candidates Moulitsas backs are hardly extremist, and one could argue that some, like Ned Lamont, are closer to being Democrats than the Democrats (Joe Lieberman) they are running against.

We hear this spin about Democrats being too extreme from Republicans every election year. Every election year, Democrats run their 'Republican lite' candidates and lose to Republicans. It's Republicans who are now extreme, dropping the libertarian views of their party for more authoritarian ones.

Sorry, this strikes me as a slightly ridiculous idea. Why should Democrats be any more discredited by Bloggers than the Republicans are by people like Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh,O'Reilly, etc. Or by Bloggers who seem to coordinate with the RNC (as do their TV and radio counterparts). Let progressives stop wringing their hands at the prospect that someone might disapprove of us: that's what it's all about, after all.

The comments to this entry are closed.