Democrats turn to Hollywood for messaging help

[Associate Justice PiT]

Yeah that’ll definitely help with their elitism and coastal image.....honestly, it’s like the National Democratic establishment WANTS to lose.

     Given that Hollywood is firmly identified with the cultural elite that has alienated many people from the Democratic Party, it does seem like an astoundingly bad idea. A little besides the point, but I would rather move away from lending credence from what actors, musicians, and athletes think about politics, regardless of their political persuasions.

It should be obvious where I stand on the broader issue, but this is one point I'll never understand. It's not as if each ad opens with "Hollywood Jews and Gays Are Responsible for Drafting This Message"; it's one thing to produce ads with celebrities in them (it's a joke, feeds said narrative and doesn't work), but collaborating with those who have a solid understanding of media isn't taboo. They have unique insight into producing effective media.

More than anything, Democrats need to learn how to draft the right messages on their own - and that revolves around actually speaking to a wide swath of regular people (including many who may not fall under the current umbrella of two-dimensional identity pitches, upon which the party currently and heavily relies). Then they can take their feedback to Hollywood and let them devise the right pitch, production and framing. It's not as if wide swathes of Real America™ don't veg out nightly in front of Hollywood-produced material.

     The bulk of the stuff that Hollywood produces isn't aiming to be political, which is their greatest strength as a media institution. Times when Hollywood figures have aimed to be political have resulted in their current bad rap across a large segment of the population. You may be right that they will hit it in the messaging department, but they aren't the first option that would come to mind for being able to draft the right message to hit the South and Midwest.

     Maybe you put together focus groups to determine what messages play best with your target audience and Hollywood just puts it together into a slick, well-produced package. Sounds hackneyed, but that would work better than what a lot of people in this thread envision. The details of the breakdown of responsibilities are rather vague at this point.

[Adam Griffin]

Yeah that’ll definitely help with their elitism and coastal image.....honestly, it’s like the National Democratic establishment WANTS to lose.

     Given that Hollywood is firmly identified with the cultural elite that has alienated many people from the Democratic Party, it does seem like an astoundingly bad idea. A little besides the point, but I would rather move away from lending credence from what actors, musicians, and athletes think about politics, regardless of their political persuasions.

It should be obvious where I stand on the broader issue, but this is one point I'll never understand. It's not as if each ad opens with "Hollywood Jews and Gays Are Responsible for Drafting This Message"; it's one thing to produce ads with celebrities in them (it's a joke, feeds said narrative and doesn't work), but collaborating with those who have a solid understanding of media isn't taboo. They have unique insight into producing effective media.

More than anything, Democrats need to learn how to draft the right messages on their own - and that revolves around actually speaking to a wide swath of regular people (including many who may not fall under the current umbrella of two-dimensional identity pitches, upon which the party currently and heavily relies). Then they can take their feedback to Hollywood and let them devise the right pitch, production and framing. It's not as if wide swathes of Real America™ don't veg out nightly in front of Hollywood-produced material.

     The bulk of the stuff that Hollywood produces isn't aiming to be political, which is their greatest strength as a media institution. Times when Hollywood figures have aimed to be political have resulted in their current bad rap across a large segment of the population. You may be right that they will hit it in the messaging department, but they aren't the first option that would come to mind for being able to draft the right message to hit the South and Midwest.

     Maybe you put together focus groups to determine what messages play best with your target audience and Hollywood just puts it together into a slick, well-produced package. Sounds hackneyed, but that would work better than what a lot of people in this thread envision. The details of the breakdown of responsibilities are rather vague at this point.

That last paragraph was what I was saying. Again, as long as it isn't crap like this, it'll work. The problem has been letting Hollywood drum up messaging rather than relegating them to the consultant and production work.

[Rookie Yinzer]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

Except for the fact that is accepted as gospel by my whole party and half of yours

[Person Man]

Yeah that’ll definitely help with their elitism and coastal image.....honestly, it’s like the National Democratic establishment WANTS to lose.

     Given that Hollywood is firmly identified with the cultural elite that has alienated many people from the Democratic Party, it does seem like an astoundingly bad idea. A little besides the point, but I would rather move away from lending credence from what actors, musicians, and athletes think about politics, regardless of their political persuasions.

It should be obvious where I stand on the broader issue, but this is one point I'll never understand. It's not as if each ad opens with "Hollywood Jews and Gays Are Responsible for Drafting This Message"; it's one thing to produce ads with celebrities in them (it's a joke, feeds said narrative and doesn't work), but collaborating with those who have a solid understanding of media isn't taboo. They have unique insight into producing effective media.

More than anything, Democrats need to learn how to draft the right messages on their own - and that revolves around actually speaking to a wide swath of regular people (including many who may not fall under the current umbrella of two-dimensional identity pitches, upon which the party currently and heavily relies). Then they can take their feedback to Hollywood and let them devise the right pitch, production and framing. It's not as if wide swathes of Real America™ don't veg out nightly in front of Hollywood-produced material.

     The bulk of the stuff that Hollywood produces isn't aiming to be political, which is their greatest strength as a media institution. Times when Hollywood figures have aimed to be political have resulted in their current bad rap across a large segment of the population. You may be right that they will hit it in the messaging department, but they aren't the first option that would come to mind for being able to draft the right message to hit the South and Midwest.

     Maybe you put together focus groups to determine what messages play best with your target audience and Hollywood just puts it together into a slick, well-produced package. Sounds hackneyed, but that would work better than what a lot of people in this thread envision. The details of the breakdown of responsibilities are rather vague at this point.

That last paragraph was what I was saying. Again, as long as it isn't crap like this, it'll work. The problem has been letting Hollywood drum up messaging rather than relegating them to the consultant and production work.

Like I said, keep them in the back, not the front.

[Rookie Yinzer]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

Except for the fact that is accepted as gospel by my whole party and half of yours

You elected a brain dead reality star as president. Just stop.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

Except for the fact that is accepted as gospel by my whole party and half of yours

You elected a brain dead reality star as president. Just stop.

See this is what I’m talking about.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Yeah that’ll definitely help with their elitism and coastal image.....honestly, it’s like the National Democratic establishment WANTS to lose.

     Given that Hollywood is firmly identified with the cultural elite that has alienated many people from the Democratic Party, it does seem like an astoundingly bad idea. A little besides the point, but I would rather move away from lending credence from what actors, musicians, and athletes think about politics, regardless of their political persuasions.

It should be obvious where I stand on the broader issue, but this is one point I'll never understand. It's not as if each ad opens with "Hollywood Jews and Gays Are Responsible for Drafting This Message"; it's one thing to produce ads with celebrities in them (it's a joke, feeds said narrative and doesn't work), but collaborating with those who have a solid understanding of media isn't taboo. They have unique insight into producing effective media.

More than anything, Democrats need to learn how to draft the right messages on their own - and that revolves around actually speaking to a wide swath of regular people (including many who may not fall under the current umbrella of two-dimensional identity pitches, upon which the party currently and heavily relies). Then they can take their feedback to Hollywood and let them devise the right pitch, production and framing. It's not as if wide swathes of Real America™ don't veg out nightly in front of Hollywood-produced material.

     The bulk of the stuff that Hollywood produces isn't aiming to be political, which is their greatest strength as a media institution. Times when Hollywood figures have aimed to be political have resulted in their current bad rap across a large segment of the population. You may be right that they will hit it in the messaging department, but they aren't the first option that would come to mind for being able to draft the right message to hit the South and Midwest.

     Maybe you put together focus groups to determine what messages play best with your target audience and Hollywood just puts it together into a slick, well-produced package. Sounds hackneyed, but that would work better than what a lot of people in this thread envision. The details of the breakdown of responsibilities are rather vague at this point.

That last paragraph was what I was saying. Again, as long as it isn't crap like this, it'll work. The problem has been letting Hollywood drum up messaging rather than relegating them to the consultant and production work.

     I'll admit, I and many other people in this thread jumped to conclusions. We don't know enough about what this will look like to properly judge it yet, but I agree that it can definitely work if managed correctly.

[Rookie Yinzer]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

Except for the fact that is accepted as gospel by my whole party and half of yours

You elected a brain dead reality star as president. Just stop.

See this is what I’m talking about.

Is that not what he was? Republicans are hypocrites who hate the opinions of "coastal elites" unless it is an opinion that is their own. You'll deal.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow they really need to listen to guys like this.

[twenty42]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Paging Dr. Goebbels, please help us with our propaganda.

[twenty42]

Paging Dr. Goebbels, please help us with our propaganda.

You prove my point for me. Dismissing different opinions and statements of facts as propaganda is part of the smug elitism.

[Person Man]

Paging Dr. Goebbels, please help us with our propaganda.

You prove my point for me. Dismissing different opinions and statements of facts as propaganda is part of the smug elitism.

And that was an R who did this. Elitism isn't a partisan issue.

[Mr. Reactionary]

You prove my point for me. Dismissing different opinions and statements of facts as propaganda is part of the smug elitism.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When you literally have a political party asking the writers of Veep to include Democrat messaging in tv shows thats propaganda.

[Person Man]

You prove my point for me. Dismissing different opinions and statements of facts as propaganda is part of the smug elitism.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When you literally have a political party asking the writers of Veep to include Democrat messaging in tv shows thats propaganda.

Isn't that what is generally expected?

[Rookie Yinzer]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

This is an opinion not a fact. The facts are that you elected a reality Tv Con artist. So either Republicans are hypocrites or plain stupid.

[dead0man]

to be fair, it can be both

[twenty42]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

This is an opinion not a fact. The facts are that you elected a reality Tv Con artist. So either Republicans are hypocrites or plain stupid.

Which party controls the White House, the Congress, the Senate, the governorships, the state houses, the state senates, and the courts? Tell me that FACT.

[junior chįmp]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

This is an opinion not a fact. The facts are that you elected a reality Tv Con artist. So either Republicans are hypocrites or plain stupid.

Which party controls the White House, the Congress, the Senate, the governorships, the state houses, the state senates, and the courts? Tell me that FACT.

Bruh....enormous consolidated power is NOT a good thing in American politics. The majorities that the Republican party has consolidated is not a good thing. What precedes every realignment is one party, at the end of its rope, repeating the same tired out slogans of its long bygone past BUT backed up by an unstable majority that can barely govern. (in other words a contradiction)

You can continue to brag about about the GOP's majorities but they signal the end of an era. (IMO the end of the Reagan era)

[twenty42]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

This is an opinion not a fact. The facts are that you elected a reality Tv Con artist. So either Republicans are hypocrites or plain stupid.

Which party controls the White House, the Congress, the Senate, the governorships, the state houses, the state senates, and the courts? Tell me that FACT.

Bruh....enormous consolidated power is NOT a good thing in American politics. The majorities that the Republican party has consolidated is not a good thing. What precedes every realignment is one party, at the end of its rope, repeating the same tired out slogans of its long bygone past BUT backed up by an unstable majority that can barely govern. (in other words a contradiction)

You can continue to brag about about the GOP's majorities but they signal the end of an era. (IMO the end of the Reagan era)

RFK accused me of not dealing in facts, so I presented him with one. And to my utter shock, he hasn’t gotten back to me. Hope he is having a pleasant evening.

[junior chįmp]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

This is an opinion not a fact. The facts are that you elected a reality Tv Con artist. So either Republicans are hypocrites or plain stupid.

Which party controls the White House, the Congress, the Senate, the governorships, the state houses, the state senates, and the courts? Tell me that FACT.

Bruh....enormous consolidated power is NOT a good thing in American politics. The majorities that the Republican party has consolidated is not a good thing. What precedes every realignment is one party, at the end of its rope, repeating the same tired out slogans of its long bygone past BUT backed up by an unstable majority that can barely govern. (in other words a contradiction)

You can continue to brag about about the GOP's majorities but they signal the end of an era. (IMO the end of the Reagan era)

RFK accused me of not dealing in facts, so I presented him with one. And to my utter shock, he hasn’t gotten back to me. Hope he is having a pleasant evening.

Just ate a doughnut and it was delicious

[Karpatsky]

You guys have learned absolutely nothing from 2016 haven't you?

This narrative is weak and tired.

The narrative will be relevant as long as Dems keep making the same mistakes. The fact is that your party has changed nothing about the smug, elitist attitude that caused them to lose the 2016 election, instead choosing to use an inefficient, meaningless two-point Democratic plurality in the NPV as an excuse to delegitimize everything about the current Republican dominance of national and state governments.

tbf overwhelming minority rule is usually taken as delegitimizing in a democratic situation.

[Adam Griffin]

Yeah, sorry, but there are few times where I roar with laughter more than when Republicans try to assert their "majority" by pointing to their consolidated electoral power.

• At the presidential level, the GOP hasn't put a fresh face into the White House in alignment with the will of the American people in 30 years
• In the House, the GOP showed up in one of the lowest turnout elections in the past century, seized the reins of redistricting and didn't even win the PV in the House in the first cycle of that redistricting - and the two-thirds of the time when it did manage to win the PV, basically seized 10% of America's representation for itself when it wanted an alternative
• In the Senate, the GOP enjoys a natural advantage that isn't inherently the result of one of their schemes, but nevertheless tilts the playing field away from accurate representation in government and towards them
• On the Supreme Court, the GOP only has a majority because they broke and obstructed standard procedures for confirming new Justices
• At the state legislative level (see: House)

The majority of this country does not treat the GOP with legitimacy because their power is not a legitimate representation of the will of the American people. Period. While most people aren't inherently familiar with the nitty-gritty in terms of their representation being robbed, they definitely feel and know that this party is not for them, by them or with them. It's inherently no different than if a monarchy were instituted in America: if the people didn't vote for it and they have no reasonable way to end it, then there is no difference.

The longer the GOP manages to cling to the reins of power, the more the GOP (from Trump all the way down to the voters) is going to become jealous of the unprecedentedly-awful way they treated President Obama - because he and his party at least had the confidence of the voters when they held the reins...and if you think the anger of a minority of Americans against Obama was bad, just wait.  

[All Along The Watchtower]

I won't defend this and Hollywood liberals do often make me cringe, but as others have said, the Republicans have put not one, but TWO celebrities in the White House (the first of whom literally was a Hollywood actor!).

And the father-son Republican Presidents in between with the same first and last name were President mostly because the former was the son of a powerful, WASP elite Republican Senator (a confidant of Super-Popular WWII Hero President Eisenhower) who, after years of effortlessly climbing the Republican political ladder (mostly in appointed positions), hitched his political fortunes to the aforementioned Hollywood actor by agreeing to be his running mate/Vice President, while the latter had the same and first name as his father who had been President just eight years earlier.

As for Democratic Presidents and celebrities - or rather, name recognition -  Hillary Clinton was the exception, not the rule (and she lost). Few people "on the street" knew who Jimmy Carter was in 1974, or who Bill Clinton was in 1990, or who Barack Obama was in early 2004, or hell, who Bernie Sanders was in 2014. The same can not be said of the four Republican Presidents we've had within the past four decades. I reject the notion that Democrats are more obsessed with celebrities and name recognition than Republicans; if anything, it's the other way around.