What Happened to the Blogs & Talk Radio?

Campaign '08: The Blogs & Talk Radio
A whole lot of bark, but where's that bite?

Where are they? The self-described voices of the Republican & Democratic base seem rather impotent in this presidential election. Liberal blogs and conservative talk radio have been unable to direct, much less dramatically affect, the choice for Democratic & Republican nominees over the last year. McCain has become the Republicans' all but certain choice. Clinton, often more strongly attacked than W himself in the lefty blogosphere, now faces the post-partisan Obama for the Democratic nomination. "Post partisan"!?! That's almost as bad as being a conservative for many liberal blog leaders. No Howard Dean remains for these folks to rally around.

Far be it, though, for the absolutists to give up. On the AM dial, note the Washington Times last week, "Conservative talk radio is ganging up on presidential candidate John McCain, attacking him for joining Democrats to push liberal legislation." Rush Limbaugh is still going crazy even today and even with Romney's withdrawal. Limbaugh is furious that "true" conservatives should accept McCain and that Republicans should blame talk radio hosts for trying to rain on the Arizona senator's coronation.

The king of talk radio has spent years tagging John McCain as the ultimate traitor to the cause for his backing of campaign fnance reform, for leading a compromise on Democratic Senate filibusters of Bush's judicial nominees, on (at first) voting against Bush's 2001 tax cuts for the wealthy, and for being an overall sour puss by not towing the party line. But now he's left to whining that the Republican Party is treating him like a child and has threatened to vote against McCain in the fall.

Flip now to those who call themselves the "progressive creative class" -- the leading voices of the liberal blogs who saw their power peak in 2006 by contributing to (though not causing) Joe Lieberman's Democratic Senate primary loss in 2006.

Though the Internet has played an even larger role this election cycle than last, the subset that is the blogosphere has not played any larger role than Rush and his brethren in picking a nominee.

Many in the lefty blogs spent more energy in 2007 hating Hillary than trying to beat Bush. And Obama is no picnic for the pajama mafia either. That post-partisan, come together stuff is for wimpy compromisers who want to attract enough voters to actually win an election. It ain't a political potato salad that the bloggers want at their picnic.

So where does that leave right-wing radio and true blue bloggers? They are where they have been for a while -- major constituencies in the Republicans' and Democrats' base that absolutely cannot and should not be ignored. Doing so ignores the power of the blogs and radio to communicate to key activists -- activists that help expand the force needed to fight a protracted media and grassroots presidential campaign.

This presidential election has, though, proven that these constituencies are not the kingmakers they want to be. They're not even fully able to move their own audiences toward or away from candidates that fit their own views.

Comments

[altohone]

True power?

Do you seriously think the blogosphere antipathy toward Hillary's votes for the Bush agenda hasn't been a major factor in taming the Clinton machine?

It is true that our objections to Hillary's policies are labeled "hate" no matter how pleasantly we present those objections, but for you Donnie, to use that label when mentioning us is plain bias. The label was designed to diminish our objections and your use puts you into the Hillary camp aligned against us.

We may not be kingmakers, but we sure have put an end to Queen Hillary's inevitability.

There wouldn't be dozens of Hillary supporters on HuffPo distorting every word Obama or his supporters utter if we were insignificant.

You bemoan our inability to move the electorate, but we have done so. If you are seeking results within the part of the country that still trusts and relies on the corporate media though, it is clear we have work to do.

[Donnie Fowler - Huffpost Blogger]

so you missed the point. bloggers and talk radio have failed to elevate a candidate that fits their desires. maybe i should have been more clear and added that bloggers and talk radio certainly have shown an ability to hurt candidates. they just haven't proven that they can elevate any.

[Donnie Fowler - Huffpost Blogger]

and just because you disagree with me, does not make me a Clinton supporter. that's just silly labeling in an effort to discredit the substantive point.

[DickTater]

I would have been for a Edwards/Kucinich type dem. When my choices were whittled to HRC or BHO, I find that HRC is a proven corporate shill and BHO is not (proven). Even if he was, he has MUCH less baggage than HRC, from my standpoint. My standpoint? Anything but another corporate shill.

I have nothing against HRC, personally. If she still stood for all the things her bio said she used to stand for, I would elect her in a heartbeat. It is NOT MY FAULT that she chose to sit idle while Bush ruined the country. It is not my fault that she is so deeply in bed with corporations, and the corporate arm of the Dem party. But she is. What am I supposed to do? Pretend I don't care? Bush is not much of a conservative, or even republican. He is a corporate hit man. I do not think HRC is much of a progressive or a liberal, she is a corporate creature. If there is one thing corporate creatures are good at, it is sticking it to their constituents and keeping the corporate gravy flowing into their political careers.

People so enamoured or attached to their candidate that anybody who doesn't agree is a HATER...and also every nuance, every media utterance is coming thru their filters as HATE and Media Hit Jobs.
To be true Mr Fowler, I spend all day trolling political sites and reading the news. I don't see what you are seeing. I think the media is horrible and unfair and has been (in it's modern form) for 30 years. BHO and HRC get equally crapped on by the media, in comparison to the free ride the Repubs. get. It is corporate media, after all.
Your HRC Hatin' Radar is set way too high. It smells just like the rightwinger's smell of acrid paranoia and fanatical, mindless devotion to a cause/team. How else can you explain their defense of Bush for the last 8 years? Can you not see the same attitude at work here?

[Donnie Fowler - Huffpost Blogger]

where, exactly, did i express support or dislike of Clinton in my post ("Your HRC Hatin' Radar is set way too high")?

of course the media is corporate owned and are most interested in making profits rather than news. they will go wherever the dollars are rather than wherever the ideology is. green for them is stronger than red or blue.

but how do you explain conservative activists' just-as-sincere belief that the media (excepting Fox and AM talk radio) has a powerful liberal bias? if you're sincere and they're sincere, then what giver?

[spinstahbabe]

Yay, post-partisanship!

[Democrab]

I know the Post has been jumping on the Obama frenzy, but I still love the face of this blog and the nature of debate that lies within.

Huffington Post has done a great job as has Kieth Olbermann to keep us aware of the idiocy of right wing supremacy.

When the primaries are over, they'll hopefully get back to evenly divided good old left wing bias for democrats. That's why we love them.

[Donnie Fowler - Huffpost Blogger]

bravo!

[nancytheragingliberal]

Right-wing crazies are acting more crazy than ever..In fact, they have no problem beating their hate drums against McCain or anyone else who is not a true "conservative". That word makes my head spin, however, I prefer, liberal/progressive. At least we try to provide for the impoverished of the world, as opposed to tax breaks to the top 5%, corporations, Halliburton, Exon-Mobile, you name it. It is an outrage that 50 million Americans go uninsured, including children, which really upsets me. Come on you right-wing, ultra-rich, how about providing some love to your less fortunate brothers and sisters? Rush, Laura, Michelle, Hannity and their ilk are hateful, mean-spirited "conservatives". Give us a break, like some progressive shows, so people like me can watch some interesting dialogue. We need a TV station that caters to the Nancy's of the world, for a change.

[Donnie Fowler - Huffpost Blogger]

bravo, too!

but don't forget that the Internet is stronger for progressives while AM talk radio is stronger for conservatives. national public radio is better for progressives while Fox News is better for conservatives. they've got the wall street journal and we've got the new york times.