Synthaholic
Diamond Member
I've been a fan of Brian Beutler's political writing for a while now. He started a newsletter called Off Message. I get his emails, some of them with a lot of content. Here's from his latest. He makes very good points.
In an appearance on MSNBC this week, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi articulated her theory of the election, which in her mind will depend on emphasizing the real economic contrast between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
“There are those who have real, legitimate concerns about immigration, globalization, innovation, and what does that mean for their job and their family’s future,” she said. “And we have to address those concerns. And Joe Biden is doing that—[he] created nine-million jobs in his term in office. Donald Trump has the worst record of job loss of any president.”
Regular readers know I doubt whether any recitation of facts, stripped from a larger storyline or contrast of character, will sway the kinds of voters she has in mind. And as if to prove my point, Pelosi’s interviewer, Katy Tur, chimed in to provide that kind of context—it just wasn’t the context Pelosi wanted to hear.
“That was a global pandemic,” she stipulated.
“He had the worst record of any president!” Pelosi shot back. “We’ve had other concerns in our country. If you want to be an apologist for Donald Trump, that may be your role, but it ain’t mine.”
The bitter exchange fits neatly into a larger story about Democrats reassessing their relationship with the mainstream media. Pelosi wanted voters to hear this unflattering contrast between Trump and Biden, Tur countered with mitigating context, and so Pelosi, instead of defending the point, pounded the table.
Many liberals found Pelosi’s response cathartic. But I think it would’ve been more effective and persuasive if she had demonstrated greater contextual fluency—if she knew how to tell a plausible story rather than recite a set of facts. I’m less interested in the exchange for what it reveals about the professional habits of mainstream media than for what it reveals about how people process information to form political opinions.
All of that context is valid. Most of it reflects poorly on Trump. Pelosi didn’t draw on any of it. Tur only drew on the exculpatory bits. Why is that? Why couldn’t Pelosi marshal more evidence that Trump failed the country in 2020, and why was Tur armed only with Trump-friendly spin?
I think it has something to do with the fact that Democrats chose to wash their hands of pandemic politics (and of narrative-building generally) many years ago, while Trump has consistently exploited the pandemic to sidestep accountability for his many failures. “Biden has created a bunch of jobs” and “Trump’s jobs record isn’t really his fault because of the pandemic” are the two brickbats the parties bring to this particular fight, and so they were close at hand. But Pelosi’s weapon of choice was a fact, and Tur’s counterpoint was a story. A simple, legible story. And so to me it’s sort of no wonder Trump continues to whoop Biden in economic-stewardship polling, even as, under a full accounting of his record, it’d be insane to entrust him with the economy (to say nothing of another pandemic) ever again.
If Pelosi had been more nimble, she would’ve compared Trump to his peers overseeing advanced economies. That Trump had a worse jobs record than any president before him is a bit of a non-sequitur—most presidents don’t oversee pandemics! That Trump did a worse job than other leaders at the time is very relevant. She might also have insisted on some consistency: If reporters intend to give Trump a pass on his job-loss record, because the pandemic was a global phenomenon, they should also give Biden a pass on inflation, which was also a global, pandemic-induced phenomenon, too. And they should note that Biden’s inflation-fighting record outshined his peers, while during the acute phase of the pandemic under Trump, the U.S. was an international disgrace.
But it would be better if she, and Democrats in general, had stories of their own to tell.
Democrats Need To Tell Better Stories
In an appearance on MSNBC this week, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi articulated her theory of the election, which in her mind will depend on emphasizing the real economic contrast between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
“There are those who have real, legitimate concerns about immigration, globalization, innovation, and what does that mean for their job and their family’s future,” she said. “And we have to address those concerns. And Joe Biden is doing that—[he] created nine-million jobs in his term in office. Donald Trump has the worst record of job loss of any president.”
Regular readers know I doubt whether any recitation of facts, stripped from a larger storyline or contrast of character, will sway the kinds of voters she has in mind. And as if to prove my point, Pelosi’s interviewer, Katy Tur, chimed in to provide that kind of context—it just wasn’t the context Pelosi wanted to hear.
“That was a global pandemic,” she stipulated.
“He had the worst record of any president!” Pelosi shot back. “We’ve had other concerns in our country. If you want to be an apologist for Donald Trump, that may be your role, but it ain’t mine.”
The bitter exchange fits neatly into a larger story about Democrats reassessing their relationship with the mainstream media. Pelosi wanted voters to hear this unflattering contrast between Trump and Biden, Tur countered with mitigating context, and so Pelosi, instead of defending the point, pounded the table.
Many liberals found Pelosi’s response cathartic. But I think it would’ve been more effective and persuasive if she had demonstrated greater contextual fluency—if she knew how to tell a plausible story rather than recite a set of facts. I’m less interested in the exchange for what it reveals about the professional habits of mainstream media than for what it reveals about how people process information to form political opinions.
TUR-ING TEST
That the country lost jobs on net under Trump is a fact. That Trump’s jobs record would have been net-positive but for the pandemic is also a fact. That the pandemic hit the United States harder economically and mortally than peer countries due to Trump’s derelictions of duty is also, to fair-minded people, indisputable. That peer countries, with more robust safety nets, had an easier time absorbing the initial economic shock of the pandemic is also true, and an embarrassment to the United States that predates Trump. On the fifth hand, Trump is the leader of a party that seeks to decimate our existing patchwork of social-insurance programs, and even tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act—a health-care system Democrats established over a decade ago specifically for working-age people who don’t or can’t get insurance from their employers. The ones that were shedding jobs by the million four years ago.All of that context is valid. Most of it reflects poorly on Trump. Pelosi didn’t draw on any of it. Tur only drew on the exculpatory bits. Why is that? Why couldn’t Pelosi marshal more evidence that Trump failed the country in 2020, and why was Tur armed only with Trump-friendly spin?
I think it has something to do with the fact that Democrats chose to wash their hands of pandemic politics (and of narrative-building generally) many years ago, while Trump has consistently exploited the pandemic to sidestep accountability for his many failures. “Biden has created a bunch of jobs” and “Trump’s jobs record isn’t really his fault because of the pandemic” are the two brickbats the parties bring to this particular fight, and so they were close at hand. But Pelosi’s weapon of choice was a fact, and Tur’s counterpoint was a story. A simple, legible story. And so to me it’s sort of no wonder Trump continues to whoop Biden in economic-stewardship polling, even as, under a full accounting of his record, it’d be insane to entrust him with the economy (to say nothing of another pandemic) ever again.
If Pelosi had been more nimble, she would’ve compared Trump to his peers overseeing advanced economies. That Trump had a worse jobs record than any president before him is a bit of a non-sequitur—most presidents don’t oversee pandemics! That Trump did a worse job than other leaders at the time is very relevant. She might also have insisted on some consistency: If reporters intend to give Trump a pass on his job-loss record, because the pandemic was a global phenomenon, they should also give Biden a pass on inflation, which was also a global, pandemic-induced phenomenon, too. And they should note that Biden’s inflation-fighting record outshined his peers, while during the acute phase of the pandemic under Trump, the U.S. was an international disgrace.
But it would be better if she, and Democrats in general, had stories of their own to tell.
Last edited by a moderator:
