[Note: I present to you our latest guest post, this one coming anonymously from a regular Blog P.I. correspondent and Democratic strategist who describes himself as "exasperated by the stupidity of armchair analysts" -- with the the above-mentioned armchair analyst, particularly. With a nod to Not Larry Sabato, we'll just call him Not Paul Begala. The rest of this post is his.]
I would be willing to bet that bloggers are more “satisfied” folks than most people. They get to expunge the vitriol that inevitably builds up from day after day of reading the simplistic rantings of unqualified morons. We the frequent readers miss out on this catharsis and sit here, perpetually pent-up and ready to throw our computers, phones and cats at the wall in frustration at people who don’t know what they are writing about. Guess I need to blog more often — so thanks to Blog P.I. for allowing me this chance to vent.
My subject is the “influential blogger” (as Matt Bai points out) Chris Bowers and the utter stupidity he posted today on MyDD. Bowers is upset that the DCCC is spending too much money in red districts because if we were to win there, the majority might not last as long as if we focused on more blue districts. Set aside the fact that most Democratic bloggers have called for a 50-state strategy (see Bowers’ 2004 post, “Fifty State Strategy”) (and by extension, 435-district strategy) and consider this, from today:
“Over the past three months, by a count of 3-1 the DCCC has spent its resources in Republican-held red districts. We need to be spending much more money in blue districts that will be easier to defend, and produce Democrats more likely to stay with the majority of the caucus on difficult votes.”
What pisses me off to no end about this is the macro look this moron just took at winning the House — as if you can tell by the Partisan Voter Index (supplied by Cook Political Report) how easy it is to win a district. Or how he just forgets conveniently that Red districts have leanings where it’s much easier to define a Democrat as a liberal, pussy, God-hating yuppie. It takes money in mail, TV, research and polling to fend some of this stuff off.
So, allow me to comment on every race he lists and why the DCCC spends what it does:
- RED DISTRICTS
- AZ-08: $445,210.71. PVI: Republican +1.4 Hey idiot, they dropped $350K in the primary trashing the Republican they would have a harder time beating and hit the jackpot — getting the conservative crackpot — so this is a safe pickup. Money well spent.
- IL-06: $82,946.87. PVI: Republican +2.9 It’s about a half million a week to run TV here, and it shows. They’ve spent a $100K compared to the NRCC’s $500K? You call that overspending in Red districts?
- IN-02: $319,879.08. PVI: Republican +4.3
- IN-08: $833,899.63. PVI: Republican +8.5
- IN-09: $83,428.98. PVI: Republican +7.1 All Indiana districts are a good investment — local dislike of Mitch “The Blade” Daniels plus prevailing national winds makes it the best time ever to get these seats. And the reason there’s $800K in 08? Hostettler has $70K on hand, and he doesn’t raise money because he knows the NRCC will save his butt. They hate him, we love him. And we’re lucky Sodrel hasn’t decided to millionaire the shit out of us in 09, cause he can do that you know. That $80K is cheap so far.
- KY-04: $13,833.64. PVI: Republican +11.7 Spending is actually low here for a Cincy media market, but it will come.
- NY-24: $390,447.98. PVI: Republican +0.6 It’s an open seat for fuck’s sake, if you don’t spend the money, the NRCC defines you. Do you want that?
- NC-11: $118,496.90. PVI: Republican +7.1 They’ve actually laid off here, again, I think, waiting to buy broadcast.
- OH-15: $52,832.64. PVI: Republican +1.1 See NC-11.
- PA-10: $259,195.99. PVI: Republican +8.0 Every dollar spent here draws two dollars from the NRCC because they’re defending a guy who choked his girlfriend.
- VA-02: $129,493.94. PVI: Republican +5.9 This is probably some polling and mail. They’re not sure they can do anything here until they think the Senate race is in play.
- WI-08: $275,778.90. PVI: Republican +3.7 Again, they have to respond to the NRCC if they want to keep this race in play. The open-seat challenger had zero money to respond to TV.
Total: $3,005,445.26
- BLUE DISTRICTS
- CO-07: $118,907.65 PVI: Democratic +2.3 Why spend money when the Dem is going to win and has money?
- FL-22: $135,800.60. PVI: Democratic +3.6 They’re waiting to buy broadcast TV in Miami. That shit ain’t cheap.
- IA-01: $357,042.22– PVI: Democratic +4.8 This is a pickup, through and through. The Dem who won the primary was broke, so they had to fill in for him.
- NM-01: $230,526.42 PVI: Democratic +2.4 That’s a pretty good investment, I don’t know what you’re complaining about. This is New Mexico, not New York.
- PA-06: $102,239.29 PVI: Democratic +2.2 See FL-22. TV is expensive, especially Philly TV.
- WA-08: $28,204.03. PVI: Democratic +2.3 You have to believe you can win before you spend money and they’re just not there yet. Plus, the NRCC hasn’t gone in and played, that signals how the D-Trip reacts to this race.
Total: $972,720.21
Another annoying thing is Bowers’ unexplained selectivity: He failed to include the other two PA contests, the three CT races, plus IA-03, GA-12 and IL-08. But what will all those show you? Not much else but that each race has multiple factors that determine spending. You know those challengers that started out a whole year in advance had plenty of time to raise resources for some of these fights. That determines spending, too. The point is, local shit matters. The story of each race matters. Macro analysis is not enough.
Now, my work done here, I can get back to the tedious job of trying to send Dems to Congress and building back up to the point of having to refute these fools again.
It’s pretty hard to take seriously someone who angrily spouts off about “morons” and “idiots” and “fools” non-stop. Cut out the silly invective and try again.
To expand briefly: I have no problem calling opponents names when warranted. But when I am trying to convince people ostensibly on my side of the rightness of my views and the wrongness of theirs… I try to be a little bit more politic. Calling someone a “moron” is a pretty sure way to get them NOT to listen to you.
So for all “NPB’s” big talk about his one day having to “refute” certain viewpoints again later, it hardly seems like he really cares. If he did care about changing minds, he wouldn’t have used such abrasive language. For someone who claims to be a political operative, this seems elementary to me.
Not Paul Begala,
I’m a committed Republican, but you know what? This is probably the best post I’ve read in months–and it’s not because of Chris Bowers. I feel the EXACT same frustration with “influential bloggers” on the right. I’m no pro, no “expert,” and certainly not a particularly influential blogger, but DAMN, it’s like the political blogosphere exists solely to give people who flunked Common Sense 101 something to do. They don’t understand human psychology, logic, statistics, sociology, or any of the variables, much less REAL politics, politicians, or elections at all. It’s not rocket science, but it sure as hell isn’t regurgitating what their favorite talking heads say, either.
We the frequent readers miss out on this catharsis and sit here, perpetually pent-up and ready to throw our computers, phones and cats at the wall in frustration at people who don’t know what they are writing about. Guess I need to blog more often — so thanks to Blog P.I. for allowing me this chance to vent.
Trust me, you’ll be throwing things at the wall far more often if blogging becomes a habit. I go through phases (like right now–so how did I find this post???) where I can’t even read other blogs because they drive me nuts. I can’t even be bothered to write about it, either. As Walter Sobchek would say, they’re “a buncha f*ckin’ amateurs.” Save your sanity–guest-blog like this on occasion, but don’t tie yourself to a regularly-updated blog. You might end up rivaling me as the most cranky anti-blogosphere blogger!
: sigh :
–”Not Mary Matalin” ;-)
DavidNYC:
WHY are bloggers so thin-skinned?! Sorry, but sometimes frustration brings out the vitriol (and really, this post wasn’t that vitriolic). Sometimes the urge to smack people with a Cluebat takes over. I’ve done it too; in fact, I made a similar (although MUCH MORE venomous) post about my own “side” this week, myself. It’s not a habit, but sometimes shouting is the only way to be heard above the loud cacophony of clueless babble. And really, don’t you get frustrated at times as well? Think about it: there are a lot of “influential bloggers” out there who really don’t know what they’re talking about, despite appearing to because they speak the language of politics.
Thankfully, Joe Schmo Voter doesn’t read blogs much–yet. Unfortunately (and I know I’m a lone voice among bloggers in this view) the media (also usually clueless) seems to be taking their cues more and more from blogs with this election cycle. Blogs have their place and aren’t ALL BAD, but there’s a lot of crap out there that carries undue influence.
Beth,
Glad you liked my vent. I don’t remember where I saw it, but some study (not sure how credible, but i liked the results) said something about 10% of the contributors to a group site like Wikipedia do 90% of the contributing.
I feel like there is a similar metric in the blog world. 10% of the posters/commenters account for 90% of the content. But I think statistics on the readers are probably different. I think there are a bunch of readers out there that feel the same way as we do.
NPB