top of page

Democrats: Time to Get Tough!

By Jessie Seigel / March 18, 2024




The time for “nice” is over. Bi-partisanship—if it ever really existed—is long-dead; only the fiction remains. Going high when the Republicans go low will be the death of democracy. Democrats, who--for decades--have been too civil to understand how to fight or be willing to do so, better now learn, and in a hurry.

 

Every Democrat—from President Biden down to any citizen who cares about our democratic system of government—needs to read political strategist Rachel Bitecofer’s book, Hit ‘Em Where It Hurts, How to Save Democracy by Beating Republicans at Their Own Game (written with Aaron Murphy). This book, a crash course in how to fight the Republican fascist putsch teaches methods to turn that party's tactics back on them, no holds barred. (The only Republican tactic Ms. Bitecofer rejects—and properly so--is the Republican use and promotion of lies.)

 

Republican Strategic Advantages

 

Ms. Bitecofer points out that the Republican party historically has had a more centralized and organized political infrastructure than the Democratic Party. And that this infrastructure is well funded by billionaires and corporations.

 

Even more important, conservative so-called think tanks are not the research non-profits they pretend to be, but partisan entities. As early as 1980, ten days after Ronald Reagan’s election, the right-wing Heritage Foundation handed him a document called the Mandate for Leadership—three thousand pages containing at least two thousand conservative proposals Heritage had prepared. Then President Reagan, behaving like their front-man, immediately passed the Mandate on to the members of his cabinet.

 

In 1985, the New York Times wrote that Heritage Foundation analysts were “expected to cultivate sources in Congress and the Administration, sense what issues are becoming ripe and produce terse position papers that can be used to sway political argument.”

 

By contrast, liberal think tanks passively conduct policy-based research, make that research available to the public, and hope someone uses their ideas. This ivory-tower approach is ineffectual at affecting policy.

 

In addition, Bitecofer cites a 2015 Boston Globe article that published an analysis of the speaking comprehension levels of the many candidates then running for president. Based on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test that examined elements like sentence length and syllable count, the analysis stated that Trump’s speech was at a low enough comprehension level to be understood by fourth graders. Clinton’s speech was at an eighth-grade level. And Bernie Sanders’ speech was at a tenth-grade level.

 

Bitecofer notes that according to Gallup and the U.S. Department of Education, 54 percent of Americans between sixteen and seventy-four years of age read below a sixth-grade level.

 

She concludes that Republican messaging works because most Republicans in positions of power, their think tanks, and their partisan news media keep their messages simple: “easy-to-understand words that communicate and reinforce shared values, ideals, and emotions—especially fear and threat.” Also, they all repeat the message in identical words and do so over and over ad nauseam.

 

By contrast, the Democratic Party seems to think “that truth and reason will ultimately prevail” if they simply present honest facts and figures. But without a succinct, uniform message consistently repeated over and over, the Democrats are constantly left playing defense when they should be on offense or, at a minimum, launching a counter-offensive.

 

 The Lessons Democrats Must Learn from the Republicans

 

According to Bitecofer there are a number of Republican messaging strategies that Democrats would be well-advised to adopt.

 

The first is branding. Republicans use dishonestly loaded phrases  like “tax and spend liberals,” “pro-crime socialists,” and “groomers of children into sexual deviants,” among others, to negatively brand Democrats.

 

Bitecofer urges Democrats to rebrand themselves “with a single guiding value—one symbolic word.” She proposes that the word reflect the party’s “complex and diverse party under one emotive umbrella, and be shaped by negative partisanship strategy.”  The word she chooses: FREEDOM.

 

At this time, when the survival of the nation’s democracy is at stake, it is perfectly accurate for Democrats to rebrand themselves as the party of freedom—and negatively brand the Republicans as the party of fascism. Bitecofer advises that they “use it whenever possible as a guiding star for their political messaging.”

 

She also strongly urges Democrats to stop making detailed arguments issue by issue. Instead, connect each issue to freedom vs. fascism. She provides the following examples:

 

outlawing drag shows and gender-affirming medical care isn’t just an LGBTQ issue, it is an attack on freedom. Banning books doesn’t protect children; it takes away their freedom! Raising questions about a free and fair election with no evidence of fraud isn’t just entertaining a conspiracy theory, it’s an attack on our freedom to choose our own government….If a MAGA Republican claims losing his assault rifle is a violation of his freedom, reframe his objection as a violation of a third grader’s freedom to go to school without getting murdered by an assault weapon.

 

Furthermore, instead of feeling compelled to defend their positions when attacked, Democrats should launch counteroffensives. Among Bitecofer’s many instructive examples: when Republicans try to blame Democrats for a bad economy, forget the longwinded explanation of why it is not really bad. Instead, talk about how the Republican Party destroyed the American middle class with its “voodoo” Reagonomics and promote Bidenomics as the remedy.

 

While the Republicans use straw-men to put the public in fear, Democrats can legitimately raise the public’s fear level about real threats. But they must do so succinctly in a way that will “make your audience actually feel your message in the gut rather than merely hear it.”

 

In relation to the Supreme Court’s anti-abortion decision and the horrific efforts to expand and build upon that, Ms. Bitecofer advises Democrats not to go on and on with details about Justice Thomas, the Court’s decision-making process, or Republicans stacking the Court. Instead, employ the Republican fear tactic. Simply say: “Republicans have stripped American women of their freedom. Will they come for yours next?”

 

Bitecofer rightly argues that Democrats must “get comfortable” with taking partisan credit and asserting partisan blame. They must claim Democratic achievements as those of the Democrats, not just generic congressional achievements.

 

And they must stop perpetuating the fiction of bipartisanship—that Republicans participated in creating the helpful policies Democrats passed despite uniform Republican obstruction. That fiction is harmful. It permits Republicans to take credit for popular policies they staunchly opposed. (Even if a few Republicans voted for such policies, one or two Republicans going along is not true bipartisanship.)

 

Furthermore, attacking special interests like Big Pharma, the NRA, or Big Oil, etc. dilutes the effort to hold Republicans accountable. It is Republicans who are funded by these interests and who vote accordingly. Therefore, Bitecofer advises, Democrats’ should lay the inability to pass legislation protecting the public directly at the feet of the the party using its votes to favor of those interests: the Republicans—and all of the Republicans.

 

This article has been only an overview of Rachel Bitecofer’s instruction in the “art of electoral war.” It is no substitute for reading the book itself—which is extremely reader-friendly.

 

It appears that President Biden has already effectively applied some of Bitecofer’s principles in his spontaneous reaction to Republican heckling at his recent State of the Union address. But far more needs to be practiced—not only by the president, but by every senator, congressman, or Democratic surrogate who speaks to the media.

 

And it is essential that they coordinate to deliver their messages in the same words and do so over and over until those words and phrases replace—or at a minimum can effectively compete—with the Republicans’ organized right-wing propaganda.

 

Staying above the fray will not win elections. And this year, when a Republican win of the presidency, a majority in congress, or a majority of state houses will result in the end of democracy, the Democrats cannot afford to lose.

46 views3 comments

3 Comments


Guest
Mar 19, 2024

(Continuing comment apparently cut off at the end)-- the ability to freely express one's opinion, for example. The concept of "freedom," with appropriate examples, sharp argument and repetition, may help chip away at Trump's base.


It is horrifying that MAGA voters do not seem to understand what a dictator is or does, preferring to be directed by a con-man who will tell them what to think and do. So there's that.

Like

Guest
Mar 19, 2024

"Logocide," the killing of words, is a term used in Chris Hedges' "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America." Words are hijacked by would-be dictators. Truthful words are demeaned and shaded to mean something else. For example, an "insurrectionist" is now a "hostage." "Terrorist" is now a word applicable to Muslims (never to us), losing its proper generic meaning. A "conspiracy theory" is now a pejorative phrase, implying falsity of the referenced matter just by its use, though as a former lawyer I understand that a conspiracy is simply an agreement between two or more people to do an unlawful act. "Liberty" to a MAGA voter may not mean what it means to most people--…


Like
Guest
Mar 26, 2024
Replying to

Yes. Yours is an excellent analysis of how language is used and misused to manipulate. Jessie


Like
bottom of page